Today in Judaism: TODAY IS: SUNDAY, ADAR I 30, 5774 • MARCH 2, 2014 ROSH CHODESH ADAR
TODAY'S LAWS & CUSTOMS:
• ROSH CHODESH OBSERVANCES
Today is the first of the two Rosh Chodesh ("Head of the Month") days for the month of "Adar II" (when a month has 30 days, both the last day of the month and the first day of the following month serve as the following month's Rosh Chodesh).
Special portions are added to the daily prayers: Hallel (Psalms 113-118) is recited -- in its "partial" form -- following the Shacharit morning prayer, and the Yaaleh V'yavo prayer is added to the Amidah and to Grace After Meals; the additional Musaf prayer is said (when Rosh Chodesh is Shabbat, special additions are made to the Shabbat Musaf). Tachnun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted.
Many have the custom to mark Rosh Chodesh with a festive meal and reduced work activity. The latter custom is prevalent amongst women, who have a special affinity with Rosh Chodesh -- the month being the feminine aspect of the Jewish Calendar.
Links: The 29th Day; The Lunar Files
DAILY QUOTE:
Are you as careful with what comes out of your mouth as you are with what enters into it?--Chassidic saying
DAILY STUDY
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Vayikra, 1st Portion Leviticus 1:1-1:13 with Rashi
• Chapter 1
1. And He called to Moses, and the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying, א. וַיִּקְרָא אֶל משֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר יְהֹוָה אֵלָיו מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר:
And He called to Moses: Every [time God communicated with Moses, whether it was represented by the expression] וַיְדַבֵּר, “And He spoke,” or וַיֹּאמֶר; “and He said,” or וַיְצַו, “and He commanded,” it was always preceded by [God] calling [to Moses by name] (Torath Kohanim 1:2-3). [קְרִיאָה] is an expression of affection, the [same] expression employed by the ministering angels [when addressing each other], as it says, “And one called (וְקָרָא) to the other…” (Isa. 6:3). To the prophets of the nations of the world, however, He revealed Himself through expressions denoting coincidence and impurity, as the verse says, “and God happened to [meet] (וַיִּקָּר) Balaam” (Num. 23:4). - [Bemidbar Rabbah 52:5] [The expression וַיִּקָּר has the meaning of a coincidental happening, and also alludes to impurity. [See Deut. 23:11, regarding the expression מִקְרֵה לַיְלָה.]
ויקרא אל משה: לכל דברות ולכל אמירות ולכל צוויים קדמה קריאה, לשון חבה, לשון שמלאכי השרת משתמשים בו, שנאמר (ישעיה ו ג) וקרא זה אל זה, אבל לנביאי אומות העולם נגלה עליהן בלשון עראי וטומאה, שנאמר (במדבר כג ד) ויקר א-להים אל בלעם:
And He called to Moses: The [Divine] voice emanated and reached Moses’ ears, while all [the rest] of Israel did not hear it. One might think that for each new section [representing a new topic], there was also [such] a call. Scripture, therefore, states, “and [the Lord] spoke (וַיְדַבֵּר) [to him],” [denoting that] only for speech, [i.e., when God “spoke” to Moses, or “said” to him, or “commanded” him,] was there a call, but not at the subsections. [For when these expressions are employed, they demarcate the beginning of major sections, i.e., when God first called to Moses and then proceeded with the prophecy at hand, unlike the beginning of each separate subsection, when God simply continued His communication to Moses without “calling” him anew. Now, if each subsection in the Torah does not represent a new beckoning from God to Moses, ushering in a new prophecy, then] what is the purpose of these subsections? To give Moses a pause, to contemplate between one passage and the next, and between one subject and another. [And if this pause for contemplation was given to the great Moses when being taught by God, then] how much more [necessary is it] for an ordinary man learning [Torah] from another ordinary man [to be allowed pauses between sections and subjects, to carefully contemplate and understand the material being learned]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:3]
ויקרא אל משה: הקול הולך ומגיע לאזניו, וכל ישראל לא שומעין. יכול אף להפסקות היתה קריאה, תלמוד לומר וידבר, לדבור היתה קריאה, ולא להפסקות. ומה היו הפסקות משמשות, ליתן ריוח למשה להתבונן בין פרשה לפרשה ובין ענין לענין, קל וחומר להדיוט הלומד מן ההדיוט:
to him: Heb. אֵלָיו [That is, God spoke only to Moses. This phrase comes] to exclude Aaron. Rabbi Judah [Ben Betheira] says: “Thirteen times in the Torah, God spoke (וַיְדַבֵּר) to both Moses and Aaron together, and, corresponding to them were thirteen [other] occasions [when God spoke only to Moses] precluding [Aaron], to teach you that they were not said [directly] to Aaron, but to Moses, that he should say them to Aaron. These are the thirteen cases where [Aaron was] precluded: (1) ”To speak with him…,“ (2) ”…speaking to him…,“ (3) ”…and He spoke to him“ (Num. 7:89); (4) ”I will meet with you [there at set times], etc. …“ (Exod. 25:22) All of them can be found [in the above dictum of Rabbi Judah] in Torath Kohanim (1:4). Now, [even though it was Moses who exclusively heard the prophecies,] one might think that they [i.e., the rest of Israel, nevertheless] heard the sound [of God] ”calling“ [to Moses preceding the prophecy]. Scripture therefore, says: [not ”He heard] the voice [speaking] to him (לוֹ),“ [but] ”[he heard] the voice [speaking right up] to him (אֵלָיו)“ (Num. 7:89). [This verse could have used the word לוֹ, ”to him,“ rather than such an exclusive expression as אֵלָיו, ”right up to him." However, it uses this expression in order to teach us that only] Moses heard [the Divine voice calling him], while all [the rest] of Israel did not hear [it]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:4]
אליו: למעט את אהרן. ר' יהודה בן בתירא אומר שלשה עשר דברות נאמרו בתורה למשה ולאהרן, וכנגדן נאמרו שלשה עשר מיעוטין, ללמדך שלא לאהרן נאמרו אלא למשה שיאמר לאהרן. ואלו הן שלשה עשר מיעוטין לדבר אתו, מדבר אליו, וידבר אליו, ונועדתי לך, כולן בתורת כהנים. יכול שמעו את קול הקריאה, תלמוד לומר קול לו, קול אליו (במדבר ז פט), משה שמע, וכל ישראל לא שמעו:
from the Tent of Meeting: This teaches us that the [Divine] voice stopped and did not project itself beyond the Tent [of Meeting]. One might think that this was because the voice was low. Scripture therefore says, “[And when Moses came into the Tent of Meeting, he heard] the voice” (Num. 7:89). What is the meaning of “the voice” [with the definite article]? It is the voice referred to in Psalms (29:4-5): “The voice of the Lord is in strength; the voice of the Lord is in beauty. The voice of the Lord breaks cedars.” If so, why does it say, “[and the Lord spoke to him] from the Tent of Meeting” ? [To inform us] that the [Divine] voice stopped. A case similar to this [where a powerful sound uttered within the Holy Temple was not heard outside,] is: “And the sound of the cherubim’s wings was heard up to the outer courtyard…” (Ezek. 10:5). One might think that the sound was low. Scripture therefore states [further in that verse]: “…as the voice of the Almighty God when He speaks!” Why then does the verse say, “[the sound…was heard] up to the outer courtyard” [and not further, if this sound was indeed so mighty]? Because when it reached there, it stopped. — [Torath Kohanim 1:5]
מאהל מועד: מלמד שהיה הקול נפסק ולא היה יוצא חוץ לאהל. יכול מפני שהקול נמוך, תלמוד לומר את הקול (שם), מהו הקול, הוא הקול המפורש בתהלים (כט ד - ה) קול ה' בכח קול ה' בהדר, קול ה' שובר ארזים, אם כן למה נאמר מאהל מועד, מלמד שהיה הקול נפסק. כיוצא בו (יחזקאל י ה) וקול כנפי הכרובים נשמע עד החצר החיצונה, יכול (מפני) שהקול נמוך, תלמוד לומר (שם) כקול אל שדי בדברו, אם כן למה נאמר עד החצר החיצונה, שכיון שמגיע שם היה נפסק:
[And the Lord spoke to him] from the Tent of Meeting, saying: One might think [that God spoke to Moses] from the entire house [that is, that the Divine voice emanated from the entire Tent of Meeting]. Scripture therefore states, “[and he heard the voice speaking to him] from above the ark cover” (Num. 7:89). [If so,] one might think [the voice emanated] from the entire ark cover. Scripture therefore states [further in that verse], “from between the two cherubim.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:5]
מאהל מועד לאמר: יכול מכל הבית, תלמוד לומר מעל הכפורת. יכול מעל הכפורת כולה, תלמוד לומר מבין שני הכרובים:
saying: [God told Moses:] Go forth and say to them [the children of Israel] captivating words, [namely:] “For your sake God communicates with me. ” Indeed, we find this is so for all the thirty-eight years that the Israelites were in the desert, placed under a ban, [i.e.,] from the incident involving the spies and onwards, the [Divine] speech was not addressed especially to Moses, for it says, “So it was, when all the men of war had finished dying from among the people, that the Lord spoke to me saying …” (Deut. 2: 16-17). [Only then was] the Divine speech [again] addressed specifically to me. Another explanation [of לֵאמֹר is that God says to Moses]: “Go forth and tell them My commandments, and bring Me back word whether they will accept them,” as the verse says, “and Moses reported the words of the people back to the Lord” (Exod. 19:8). - [Torath Kohanim 1:6]
לאמר: צא ואמור להם דברי כבושים, בשבילכם הוא נדבר עמי, שכן מצינו שכל שלשים ושמונה שנה שהיו ישראל במדבר כמנודים, מן המרגלים ואילך, לא נתייחד הדבור עם משה, שנאמר (דברים ב טז) ויהי כאשר תמו כל אנשי המלחמה למות וידבר ה' אלי לאמר, אלי היה הדיבור. דבר אחר צא ואמור להם דברי והשיבני אם יקבלום, כמו שנאמר (שמות יט ח) וישב משה את דברי העם וגו':
2. Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: When a man from [among] you brings a sacrifice to the Lord; from animals, from cattle or from the flock you shall bring your sacrifice. ב. דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אָדָם כִּי יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן לַיהֹוָה מִן הַבְּהֵמָה מִן הַבָּקָר וּמִן הַצֹּאן תַּקְרִיבוּ אֶת קָרְבַּנְכֶם:
When a man from [among] you brings a sacrifice: Heb. יַקְרִיב כִּי, when he brings. [That is, Scripture is not dealing here with an obligatory sacrifice, in which case it would have said, “a man shall bring ….” Rather,] Scripture is speaking here of voluntary sacrifices [and thus says, “When a man …brings a sacrifice”]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:12]
אדם כי יקריב מכם: כשיקריב, בקרבנות נדבה דבר הענין:
a man: Heb. אָדָם. Why is this term used here [as opposed to “ אָדָם ”]? [It alludes to Adam, the first man on earth, and teaches us:] Just as Adam, the first man, never offered sacrifices from stolen property, since everything was his, so too, you must not offer sacrifices from stolen property. — [Vayikra Rabbah 2:7]
אדם: למה נאמר, מה אדם הראשון לא הקריב מן הגזל, שהכל היה שלו, אף אתם לא תקריבו מן הגזל:
animals: Heb. מִן הַבְּהֵמָה. One might think that wild beasts are also included [since sometimes wild beasts are included in this term, and therefore may be offered up as sacrifices]. Scripture therefore states [here], “from cattle or from the flock.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:16]
הבהמה: יכול אף חיה בכלל, תלמוד לומר בקר וצאן:
from animals: but not all of them. [The phrase therefore comes] to exclude the case of animals that have cohabited with a human, as an active or a passive party. - [Torath Kohanim 1:17]
מן הבהמה: ולא כולה, להוציא את הרובע ואת הנרבע:
from cattle: Heb. מִן הַבָּקָר [The phrase “from cattle” comes] to exclude an animal that has been worshipped [as a deity].
מן הבקר: להוציא את הנעבד:
or from the flock: Heb. וּמִן הַצֹּאן [This phrase comes] to exclude an animal set aside [i.e., designated for sacrifice to pagan deities]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:18]
מן הצאן: להוציא את המוקצה:
or from the flock: [The extra “vav” at the beginning of this phrase comes] to exclude the case of a goring animal that has killed [a man]. Now, when [Scripture] states below (verse 3): מִן הַבָּקָר, “of cattle,” [the word מִן] need not have been used, since Scripture has already [taught us the exclusions here. Therefore, this extra word comes] to exclude a טְרֵפָה [an animal with a terminal disease or injury]. - [Torath Kohanim 1:17]
ומן הצאן: להוציא את הנוגח שהמית. כשהוא אומר למטה מן הענין (פסוק ג) מן הבקר, שאין תלמוד לומר, להוציא את הטריפה:
you shall bring: Heb. תַּקְרִיבוּ [The plural form of the verb] teaches [us] that two people may donate a voluntary burnt offering in partnership. — [Torath Kohanim 1:19]
תקריבו: מלמד ששנים מתנדבים עולה בשותפות:
your sacrifice: Heb. קָרְבַּנְכֶם [The plural form] teaches us that [a burnt offering] may also be offered as a voluntary gift from the community (Torath Kohanim 1:20). This sacrifice was called עוֹלַת קַיִץ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, “the burnt-offering which was provision for the altar.” [Every year, each twenty-year old male was taxed to give a silver half-shekel for communal sacrifices. See Exod. 30:11-16. This voluntary sacrifice] was purchased with any money remaining [from the previous year’s collection of half-shekels, and was offered as a communal burnt offering when there were no individual offerings brought, in order to prevent the altar from being bereft of sacrifices. Thus, the name “provision for the altar”]. — [Shev. 12a]
קרבנכם: מלמד שהיא באה נדבת צבור, היא עולת קיץ המזבח הבאה מן המותרות:
3. If his sacrifice is a burnt offering from cattle, an unblemished male he shall bring it. He shall bring it willingly to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, before the Lord. ג. אִם עֹלָה קָרְבָּנוֹ מִן הַבָּקָר זָכָר תָּמִים יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד יַקְרִיב אֹתוֹ לִרְצֹנוֹ לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה:
male: but not a female. When Scripture repeats later (verse 10) [that the burnt-offering must be] “a male [animal],” it appears unnecessary to state that [since Scripture has already taught us that it must be a male animal and not a female. Therefore, this repetition of the word “male,” comes to teach us that a sacrifice must consist of a completely] male [animal], not an animal of indeterminate gender or a hermaphrodite. — [Bech. 41b]
זכר: ולא נקבה. כשהוא אומר זכר למטה, שאין תלמוד לומר, זכר ולא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס:
unblemished: Heb. תָּמִים, perfect, without a blemish.
תמים: בלא מום:
[He shall bring it …] to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting: He [himself] must attend to bringing it up to the courtyard [of the Temple] (Torath Kohanim 1: 24). Why does the verse repeat the word “bring” here [when it says, “he shall bring…He shall bring it” ? This repetition teaches us that] even in the case of Reuben’s burnt offering [animal] being mixed up with Simeon’s burnt offering [animal, and the animals cannot be identified], nevertheless, each one of them must be offered up in the name of [its rightful owner] whoever that may be. Similarly, if [an animal designated for] a burnt offering has been mixed up with non-consecrated animals, the non-consecrated animals must be sold to those who need burnt offerings, and thus all of these animals are now [designated to become] burnt offerings. [Accordingly] each animal is now brought in the name of [its rightful owner] whoever that may be. Now, one might think that this must be done even if [an animal designated to become] a burnt offering became mixed up with animals unfit for sacrifice or with [animals designated to become] different kinds of sacrifices [e.g., a sin offering, a guilt offering, etc.]. Scripture therefore says here: יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ, [meaning, “he must bring it.” This teaches us that only an animal fit for and specifically designated as a burnt offering must be brought here]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:25]
אל פתח אהל מועד: מטפל בהבאתו עד העזרה. מהו אומר יקריב יקריב, אפילו נתערבה עולת ראובן בעולת שמעון, יקריב כל אחת לשם מי שהוא. וכן עולה בחולין, ימכרו החולין לצרכי עולות, והרי הן כולן עולות ותקרב כל אחת לשם מי שהוא. יכול אפילו נתערבה בפסולין או בשאינו מינו, תלמוד לומר יקריבנו:
He shall bring it: [This clause] teaches us that the person is coerced [to bring the offering if he is remiss in bringing the sacrifice he had promised]. One might think that this means that they should force him against his will [to bring the offering]! Scripture therefore says: “[He shall bring it] willingly (לִרְצֹנוֹ).” How is this possible [that on one hand he should be forced, yet on the other, he must bring the offering willingly? The explanation is that] they must coerce him until he says “I am willing.” - [R.H. 6a, Torath Kohanim 3:15] 3-4.
יקריב אתו: מלמד שכופין אותו. יכול בעל כרחו, תלמוד לומר לרצונו, הא כיצד כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני:
Before the Lord…And he shall lean: [The procedure of] leaning [the hands upon sacrifices] does not apply to a high place [a private altar. These high places were permitted to be used before the permanent Temple was built when the Mishkan was in Gilgal, Nob, and Gibeon. Certain sacrifices could be offered up on them. We learn this from the continuity of these two verses that only “before the Lord” -that is, in the sanctuary precincts-one “should lean his hand upon” the head of sacrifices, but not on a high place outside the sanctuary precincts.]- [Torath Kohanim 1:27]
לפני ה' וסמך: אין סמיכה בבמה:
4. And he shall lean his hand [forcefully] upon the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted for him to atone for him. ד. וְסָמַךְ יָדוֹ עַל רֹאשׁ הָעֹלָה וְנִרְצָה לוֹ לְכַפֵּר עָלָיו:
upon the head of the burnt offering: [The text could have simply said “upon its head.” However, it adds “burnt offering”] to include [any sacrifice that is called a “burnt offering,” namely,] (1) an obligatory burnt offering, that it too requires סְמִיכָה [leaning the hands on its head. Since this section deals with voluntary burnt offerings, this case requires an extra word to include it. See commentary on verse 2]; also included is (2) a burnt offering from the flock [that it too must have סְמִיכָה, for this is not specified in the verses dealing with the burnt offering from the flock. See verses 10-13]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:30]
על ראש העולה: להביא עולת חובה לסמיכה ולהביא עולת הצאן:
the burnt offering: [The use of the definite article here teaches us that the verse is referring to “the” burnt offering, i.e., the one mentionebd earlier, where it says, “from cattle or from the flock” (verse 2). Thus] excluding the burnt offering from birds. — [Torath Kohanim 1:30]
העולה: פרט לעולת העוף:
and it will be accepted for him: For which [sins] will [the sacrifice] be accepted for him [thereby atoning for them]? If you say that [the offering is accepted and thereby the person is atoned for] sins which incur the penalty of excision, the death penalty through the court, the death penalty through the heaven[ly court], or lashes, their punishments are [expressly] stated, [and thus, the person must undergo the respective punishment to receive atonement for those sins]. Thereby, we determine that it is accepted only for [failure to perform] a positive commandment [for which the punishment is not expressly stated in the Torah, or [violation of] a negative commandment that is attached to a positive commandment. [I.e., some negative commandments are attached to a positive commandment that relates to the same matter. An example of this is the law of the Passover lamb. The Torah states: “And you shall not leave over any of it until morning, and whatever is left over of it until morning, you shall burn in fire” (Exod. 12:10). Here, the negative commandment is “attached” to the positive commandment. How so? If someone has transgressed the negative commandment and left over some of the Passover lamb until the following morning, he may exonerate himself from the punishment he has just incurred by fulfilling the positive commandment attached, namely by burning the remainder in fire. That is an example of “a negative commandment that is attached to a positive commandment.” See Mak. 4b.]- [Torath Kohanim 1:31]
ונרצה לו: על מה הוא מרצה לו, אם תאמר על כריתות ומיתות בית דין או מיתה בידי שמים או מלקות, הרי עונשן אמור, הא אינו מרצה אלא על עשה ועל לאו שנתק לעשה:
5. And he shall slaughter the young bull before the Lord. And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall bring the blood, and dash the blood upon the altar, around [the altar] which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. ה. וְשָׁחַט אֶת בֶּן הַבָּקָר לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה וְהִקְרִיבוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֶת הַדָּם וְזָרְקוּ אֶת הַדָּם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב אֲשֶׁר פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד:
And he shall slaughter…And…the kohanim shall bring [the blood] : [Since the word kohanim is mentioned only in reference to receiving the blood, and not before, we learn that all procedures in a sacrifice] from receiving [the blood in a vessel] and onwards are the duty of the kehunah [as opposed to non- kohanim]. This teaches regarding the slaughtering [which precedes receiving the blood], that it is valid [even if performed] by a stranger [i.e., a non- kohen].-[Zev. 32a]
ושחט, והקריבו, הכהנים: מקבלה ואילך מצות כהונה, למד על השחיטה שכשרה בזר:
before the Lord: in the courtyard [of the Holy Temple].
לפני ה': בעזרה:
and […the kohanim] shall bring [the blood]: [Although וְהִקְרִיבוּ literally means “bringing,” here,] it means “receiving” [the blood in a vessel], which is the first [procedure immediately following the slaughtering]. However, it literally means “bringing” [the blood to the altar]. [Consequently,] we learn that both these procedures are the duties of Aaron’s descendants [i.e., the kohanim]. — [Chag. 11a]
והקריבו: זו קבלה שהיא הראשונה ומשמעה לשון הולכה, למדנו ששתיהן בבני אהרן:
Aaron’s descendants: One might think [that these duties may be performed as well by Aaron’s descendants who are] חִלָלִים, kohanim whose lineage invalidates them for kehunah [e.g., if the mother was divorced before marrying the kohen]. Scripture therefore adds: “the kohanim ” [indicating that these duties may be performed only by kohanim]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:38]
בני אהרן: יכול חללים, תלמוד לומר הכהנים:
[The kohanim, shall bring] the blood, and dash the blood: Why does Scripture say, “blood, blood” here twice? To include [the cases of blood from a burnt offering,] that was mixed up with the same type [of blood, i.e., the blood of burnt offerings from two different people being mixed up, and [blood from a burnt offering] that was mixed up with a different type [of blood, i.e., from another type of sacrifice]. One might think that this would also include [the case that the blood was mixed up with blood of] an unfit sacrifice, or [blood from] inner sin offerings [the blood of which is to be sprinkled on the inner altar] or [blood from] outer sin offerings [the blood of which is to be sprinkled on the outer altar] even though [the latter, have their blood dashed] above [the chut hasikra , the red line, of the altar], while this [the burnt offering has its blood dashed] below [the chut hasikra of the altar]. Scripture [therefore] states [regarding a burnt offering] in another place: “its blood” (verses 11 and 15). [This expression teaches us that only cases in which the blood of a burnt offering is mixed up with the blood of another sacrifice which is also to be dashed below the chut hasikra on the altar, no problems arise, and these bloods can both be dashed at that level of the altar. This excludes the case of inner sin offerings whose blood is sprinkled inside and outer sin offerings whose blood must be dashed above the chut hasikra]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:39]
את הדם וזרקו את הדם: מה תלמוד לומר דם דם שתי פעמים, להביא את שנתערב במינו או בשאינו מינו. יכול אף בפסולים או בחטאות הפנימיות או בחטאות החיצוניות, שאלו למעלה והיא למטה, תלמוד לומר במקום אחר את דמו:
And […the kohanim,shall…] dash [the blood…around]: [The kohen] must stand below [i.e., on the ground], and dash [the blood] from the vessel [in which it was received] onto the wall of the altar below the chut hasikra , towards the corners [of the altar. Meaning, from the ground he approaches the northeastern corner of the altar and dashes some of the blood from its receptacle onto the corner ridge where the northern wall and the eastern wall of the altar meet, below the red line. In this way, the blood dashes onto both the northern and eastern sides of the altar with one motion by the kohen. That motion is thus referred to as “one application (of blood) which is two,” i.e., one dashing motion, which applies the blood to two faces of the altar. The kohen then proceeds to the southwestern corner of the altar and again performs this procedure, thereby applying the blood to both the southern and western walls of the altar in one motion. Thus, in a total of two dashing motions, the blood has been applied to the four faces of the altar. These dashes are referred to as “two applications (of blood) which are four.”] Therefore, it says “around,” namely that [with these prescribed dashing motions] the blood is to be applied to the four sides of the altar. Now, one might think that [when the verse says that the kohen must dash the blood around the altar, this means that] he must encircle it [the altar with blood] like a thread. Scripture therefore says: “[the kohanim] shall…dash [the blood],” and it is impossible to apply it [as a continuous line] around the altar through a “dashing” motion. Alternatively, one might think that “shall…dash” refers to one dashing motion. Scripture therefore says: “around” [and it is impossible to apply the blood all around the altar with one dashing motion]. How then [should the blood be applied to the altar]? The kohen must make “two applications, which are four.” - [Torath Kohanim 1:40]
וזרקו: עומד למטה וזורק מן הכלי לכותל המזבח למטה מחוט הסיקרא כנגד הזויות, לכך נאמר סביב, שיהא הדם ניתן בארבע רוחות המזבח. או יכול יקיפנו כחוט, תלמוד לומר וזרקו, ואי אפשר להקיף בזריקה. אי וזרקו יכול בזריקה אחת, תלמוד לומר סביב, הא כיצד נותן שתי מתנות שהן ארבע:
[the altar] which is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting: But not when [the Tent of Meeting] is disassembled [even though the altar itself may be standing, since at such a time the altar is not “at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting”]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:44]
אשר פתח אהל מועד: ולא בזמן שהוא מפורק:
6. And he shall skin the burnt offering, and cut it into its [prescribed] sections. ו. וְהִפְשִׁיט אֶת הָעֹלָה וְנִתַּח אֹתָהּ לִנְתָחֶיהָ:
And he shall skin [the burnt offering]: Why does the verse say “the burnt offering” ? To include every [kind of] burnt offering [not just this one in the procedure of] skinning and cutting up [in the prescribed manner]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:45]
והפשיט את העלה: מה תלמוד לומר העולה, לרבות את כל העולות להפשט ונתוח:
its [prescribed] sections: [The verse does not state that the animal is cut into pieces, but rather “into its pieces,” implying that it must be cut into specific prescribed pieces] and not [to cut] its [prescribed] pieces into [smaller] pieces. — [Torath Kohanim 1:47; Chul. 11a]
אתה לנתחיה: ולא נתחיה לנתחים:
7. And the descendants of Aaron the kohen shall place fire on the altar, and arrange wood on the fire. ז. וְנָתְנוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן אֵשׁ עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְעָרְכוּ עֵצִים עַל הָאֵשׁ:
shall place fire [on the altar]: Even though the fire descended [miraculously] from heaven [onto the altar, to consume the sacrifices], it was [nevertheless] a mitzvah for a mortal to bring [his fire to the altar. — [Torath Kohanim 1: 49; Zev. 18a]
ונתנו אש: אף על פי שהאש יורדת מן השמים, מצוה להביא מן ההדיוט:
the descendants of Aaron the Kohen: [But we know that Aaron was a Kohen Gadol ! So what does “the Kohen ” come to teach us? It teaches us that the Kohen Gadol may perform the sacrificial service only] when he is [invested] in his kehunah [i.e., wearing the proper eight garments of the Kohen Gadol]. If, however, he officiated wearing the raiment of an ordinary kohen, his service is rendered invalid. — [Torath Kohanim 1:49]
בני אהרן הכהן: כשהוא בכיהונו, הא אם עבד בבגדי כהן הדיוט, עבודתו פסולה:
8. And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall then arrange the pieces, the head and the fat, on top of the wood which is on the fire that is on the altar. ח. וְעָרְכוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֵת הַנְּתָחִים אֶת הָרֹאשׁ וְאֶת הַפָּדֶר עַל הָעֵצִים אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:
Aaron’s descendants, the kohanim: [But we know that Aaron’s descendants are kohanim! So what does “the kohanim” come to teach us?] The [ordinary] kohanim must be functioning in their kehunah [i.e., the proper four garments of the ordinary kohanim]. If an ordinary kohen officiated wearing the “eight garments” [of a Kohen Gadol], however, his service is rendered invalid.
בני אהרן הכהנים: כשהם בכיהונם, הא כהן הדיוט שעבד בשמונה בגדים, עבודתו פסולה:
the pieces, the head: Since the head is not included in the skinning and cutting up [procedures], since it was detached by the slaughtering, the Torah had to count it individually [to inform us that it was to be placed on the altar as it is, even though it is not skinned.] - [Chul. 27a]
את הנתחים את הראש: לפי שאין הראש בכלל הפשט, שכבר הותז בשחיטה, לפיכך הוצרך למנותו לעצמו:
and the fat: Why is [the fat] mentioned [separately]? To teach you that the kohen must bring it up [onto the altar together] with the head, and that with it he covers the area where [the animal] was slaughtered. This was done in deference to the honor of God on high [because the cut throat is soiled with the blood of the head] (Rashi, Yoma 26a). - [Chul. 27a]
ואת הפדר: למה נאמר, ללמדך שמעלהו עם הראש ומכסה בו את בית השחיטה, וזהו דרך כבוד של מעלה:
[the wood] which is on the altar: The logs of wood must not project beyond the [area of the arranged] woodpile [constituting one square cubit. This is so that the kohanim would not be disturbed by protruding pieces of wood when they go around the altar]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:54]
אשר על המזבח: שלא יהיו הגזירין יוצאין חוץ למערכה:
9. And its innards and its legs, he shall wash with water. Then, the kohen shall cause to [go up in] smoke all [of the animal] on the altar, as a burnt offering, a fire offering, [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. ט. וְקִרְבּוֹ וּכְרָעָיו יִרְחַץ בַּמָּיִם וְהִקְטִיר הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הַכֹּל הַמִּזְבֵּחָה עֹלָה אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחוֹחַ לַיהֹוָה:
as a burnt offering: [I.e., the kohen] must burn the animal with the [specific] intention that it is a burnt offering. — [Torath Kohanim 1:58]
עלה: לשם עולה יקטירנו:
a fire offering: Heb. אִשֵּׁה. When he slaughters [the animal], he must slaughter it with the [specific] intention [to burn it completely in] fire. Every [instance of the word] אִשֶּׁה in Scripture, is an expression related to [the word] אֵשׁ, “fire,” foyere in Old French.
אשה: כשישחטנו יהא שוחטו לשם האש. וכל אשה לשון אש פויאד"א בלע"ז [אש]:
pleasing: Heb. נִיחוֹחַ [This word stems from the same root as the expression נַחַת רוּחַ, “contentment.” God says: “This sacrifice] gives Me contentment, for I said [My commandment], and My will was fulfilled!”
ניחוח: נחת רוח לפני, שאמרתי ונעשה רצוני:
10. And if his offering is [brought] from the flock from sheep or from goats as a burnt offering he shall sacrifice it an unblemished male. י. וְאִם מִן הַצֹּאן קָרְבָּנוֹ מִן הַכְּשָׂבִים אוֹ מִן הָעִזִּים לְעֹלָה זָכָר תָּמִים יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ:
And if…from the flock: The “vav” [meaning “and” here demonstrates that this section concerning voluntary burnt offerings from the flock] is a continuation from the previous subject [those from cattle, and is thereby connected in that the laws of each are common to both]. But why was it separated [by a paragraph]? In order to give Moses a pause, so that he could contemplate between one passage and the next. — [Torath Kohanim 1:59]
ואם מן הצאן: וי"ו מוסיף על ענין ראשון. ולמה הפסיק, ליתן ריוח למשה להתבונן בין פרשה לפרשה:
from the flock…from sheep…from goats: [The word “from” tells us that one cannot take all the animals of these classes, rather only “from” them, thereby disqualifying certain animals from being brought for a sacrifice.] These [three mentions of the word “from”] are three exclusions [from being offered as a sacrifice], excluding an aged [animal], a sick [animal] and a foul smelling [animal]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:60]
מן הצאן מן הכשבים או מן העזים: הרי אלו שלשה מיעוטין פרט לזקן, לחולה ולמזוהם:
11. And he shall slaughter it on the northern side of the altar, before the Lord. And Aaron's descendants, the kohanim, shall dash its blood upon the altar, around. יא. וְשָׁחַט אֹתוֹ עַל יֶרֶךְ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ צָפֹנָה לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה וְזָרְקוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים אֶת דָּמוֹ עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב:
on the…side of the altar: Heb. יֶרֶ הַמִזְבֵּחַ, “on the…side of the altar.”
על ירך המזבח: על צד המזבח:
[And he shall slaughter it] on the northern [side of the altar], before the Lord: [The law of] slaughtering on the northern side does not apply [when sacrificing an animal] on a high place [See above on verse 4]. — [Torath Kohanim 1:27] [We learn this from this verse that a burnt offering must be slaughtered “on the northern side of the altar” only if it is “before the Lord,” i.e., in the sanctuary precincts, but not outside them.]
צפנה לפני ה': ואין צפון בבמה:
12. And he shall cut it into its [prescribed] sections, with its head and its fat, and the kohen shall arrange them on top of the wood which is on the fire that is on the altar. יב. וְנִתַּח אֹתוֹ לִנְתָחָיו וְאֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְאֶת פִּדְרוֹ וְעָרַךְ הַכֹּהֵן אֹתָם עַל הָעֵצִים אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:
13. And the innards and the legs, he shall wash with water. Then, the kohen shall offer up all [of the animal], and cause it to [go up in] smoke on the altar. It is a burnt offering, a fire offering [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord. יג. וְהַקֶּרֶב וְהַכְּרָעַיִם יִרְחַץ בַּמָּיִם וְהִקְרִיב הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הַכֹּל וְהִקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה עֹלָה הוּא אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַיהֹוָה:
-------
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 145 - 150
• Chapter 145
One who recites this psalm three times daily with absolute concentration is guaranteed a portion in the World to Come. Because of its prominence, this psalm was composed in alphabetical sequence.
1. A psalm of praise by David: I will exalt You, my God the King, and bless Your Name forever.
2. Every day I will bless You, and extol Your Name forever.
3. The Lord is great and exceedingly exalted; there is no limit to His greatness.
4. One generation to another will laud Your works, and tell of Your mighty acts.
5. I will speak of the splendor of Your glorious majesty and of Your wondrous deeds.
6. They will proclaim the might of Your awesome acts, and I will recount Your greatness.
7. They will express the remembrance of Your abounding goodness, and sing of Your righteousness.
8. The Lord is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and of great kindness.
9. The Lord is good to all, and His mercies extend over all His works.
10. Lord, all Your works will give thanks to You, and Your pious ones will bless You.
11. They will declare the glory of Your kingdom, and tell of Your strength,
12. to make known to men His mighty acts, and the glorious majesty of His kingdom.
13. Your kingship is a kingship over all worlds, and Your dominion is throughout all generations.
14. The Lord supports all who fall, and straightens all who are bent.
15. The eyes of all look expectantly to You, and You give them their food at the proper time.
16. You open Your hand and satisfy the desire of every living thing.
17. The Lord is righteous in all His ways, and benevolent in all His deeds.
18. The Lord is close to all who call upon Him, to all who call upon Him in truth.
19. He fulfills the desire of those who fear Him, hears their cry and delivers them.
20. The Lord watches over all who love Him, and will destroy all the wicked.
21. My mouth will utter the praise of the Lord, and let all flesh bless His holy Name forever.
Chapter 146
This psalm inspires man to repent and perform good deeds while still alive. Let him not rely on mortals who are unable to help themselves, and who may suddenly pass on. Rather, one should put his trust in God, Who is capable of carrying out all He desires.
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord, O my soul.
2. I will sing to the Lord with my soul; I will chant praises to my God while I yet exist.
3. Do not place your trust in nobles, nor in mortal man who has not the ability to bring deliverance.
4. When his spirit departs, he returns to his earth; on that very day, his plans come to naught.
5. Fortunate is he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope rests upon the Lord his God.
6. He makes the heavens, the earth, the sea, and all that is in them; He keeps His promise faithfully forever.
7. He renders justice to the oppressed; He gives food to the hungry; the Lord releases those who are bound.
8. The Lord opens the eyes of the blind; the Lord straightens those who are bowed; the Lord loves the righteous.
9. The Lord watches over the strangers; He gives strength to orphan and widow; He thwarts the way of the wicked.
10. The Lord shall reign forever, your God, O Zion, throughout all generations. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 147
This psalm recounts God's greatness, and His kindness and goodness to His creations.
1. Praise the Lord! Sing to our God for He is good; praise befits Him for He is pleasant.
2. The Lord is the rebuilder of Jerusalem; He will gather the banished of Israel.
3. He heals the broken-hearted, and bandages their wounds.
4. He counts the number of the stars; He gives a name to each of them.
5. Great is our Master and abounding in might; His understanding is beyond reckoning.
6. The Lord strengthens the humble; He casts the wicked to the ground.
7. Lift your voices to the Lord in gratitude; sing to our God with the harp.
8. He covers the heaven with clouds; He prepares rain for the earth, and makes grass grow upon the mountains.
9. He gives the animal its food, to the young ravens which cry to Him.
10. He does not desire [those who place their trust in] the strength of the horse, nor does He want those who rely upon the thighs [swiftness] of man.
11. He desires those who fear Him, those who long for His kindness.
12. Praise the Lord, O Jerusalem; Zion, extol your God.
13. For He has strengthened the bolts of your gates; He has blessed your children in your midst.
14. He has made peace within your borders; He satiates you with the finest of wheat.
15. He issues His command to the earth; swiftly does His word run.
16. He dispenses snow like fleece; He scatters frost like ashes.
17. He hurls His ice like morsels; who can withstand His cold?
18. He sends forth His word and melts them; He causes His wind to blow, and the waters flow.
19. He tells His words [Torah] to Jacob, His statutes and ordinances to Israel.
20. He has not done so for other nations, and they do not know [His] ordinances. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 148
The psalmist inspires one to praise God for His creations-above and below-all of which exist by God's might alone.
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord from the heavens; praise Him in the celestial heights.
2. Praise Him, all His angels; praise Him, all His hosts.
3. Praise Him, sun and moon; praise Him, all the shining stars.
4. Praise Him, hea-ven of heavens, and the waters that are above the heavens.
5. Let them praise the Name of the Lord, for He comman-ded and they were created.
6. He has established them forever, for all time; He issued a decree, and it shall not be transgressed.
7. Praise the Lord from the earth, sea-monsters and all [that dwell in] the depths;
8. fire and hail, snow and vapor, stormy wind carrying out His command;
9. the mountains and all hills, fruit-bearing trees and all cedars;
10. the beasts and all cattle, creeping things and winged fowl;
11. kings of the earth and all nations, rulers and all judges of the land;
12. young men as well as maidens, elders with young lads.
13. Let them praise the Name of the Lord, for His Name is sublime, to Himself; its radiance [alone] is upon earth and heaven.
14. He shall raise the glory of His people, [increase] the praise of all His pious ones, the Children of Israel, the people close to Him. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 149
1. Praise the Lord! Sing to the Lord a new song, [recount] His praise in the assembly of the pious.
2. Israel will rejoice in its Maker; the children of Zion will delight in their King.
3. They will praise His Name with dancing; they will sing to Him with the drum and harp.
4. For the Lord desires His people; He will adorn the humble with salvation.
5. The pious will exult in glory; they will sing upon their beds.
6. The exaltation of God is in their throat, and a double-edged sword in their hand,
7. to bring retribution upon the nations, punishment upon the peoples;
8. to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with iron fetters;
9. to execute upon them the prescribed judgment; it shall be a glory for all His pious ones. Praise the Lord!
Chapter 150
This psalm contains thirteen praises, alluding to the Thirteen Attributes (of Mercy) with which God conducts the world.
1. Praise the Lord! Praise God in His holiness; praise Him in the firmament of His strength.
2. Praise Him for His mighty acts; praise Him according to His abundant greatness.
3. Praise Him with the call of the shofar; praise Him with harp and lyre.
4. Praise Him with timbrel and dance; praise Him with stringed instruments and flute.
5. Praise Him with resounding cymbals; praise Him with clanging cymbals.
6. Let every soul praise the Lord. Praise the Lord!
-------
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 34
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson Sunday, Adar I 30, 5774 • March 2, 2014
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 34
והנה מודעת זאת שהאבות הן הן המרכבה
It is known that “the Patriarchs constitute the Divine Chariot.“1
שכל ימיהם לעולם לא הפסיקו אפילו שעה אחת מלקשר דעתם ונשמתם לרבון העולמים
Throughout their lives, they did not cease even momentarily from binding their mind and soul to the Master of the universe,
בביטול הנ״ל ליחודו יתברך
with the aforementioned absolute surrender to His unity.
I.e., their constant awareness of G d’s unity led them to be continuously in a state of self-nullification before G d; and, as explained more fully in ch. 23, this self-nullification is what is meant by the term “chariot”, a vehicle submissive to the will of its pilot.
ואחריהם כל הנביאים, כל אחד לפי מדרגת נשמתו והשגתו
After them came all the prophets who similarly nullified themselves before G d’s unity in varying degrees, each according to the level of his soul and his understanding.
ומדרגת משה רבנו עליו השלום היא העולה על כולנה, שאמרו עליו: שכינה מדברת מתוך גרונו של משה
The rank of our teacher Moses, peace be upon him, surpassed them all; of him our Sages said:2 “The Shechinah (the Divine Presence) spoke out of Moses‘ throat.”
His was such a total surrender to G dliness, that the very words he uttered were Divine speech; the relation of Moses’ throat to Divine speech was that of one’s throat to his own speech.
ומעין זה זכו ישראל במעמד הר סיני
At Mount Sinai, Israel were privileged to experience a glimmer of this level of self-nullification.
רק שלא יכלו לסבול, כמאמר רז״ל: שעל כל דיבור פרחה נשמתן כו׳, שהוא ענין ביטול במציאות הנ״ל
But they could not endure it; as our Sages have said,3 “At every Divine utterance their souls took flight,” and G d resurrected them each time. This flight of their soul actually represents the self-nullification spoken of previously.4
לכן מיד אמר להם לעשות לו משכן ובו קדשי הקדשים להשראת שכינתו, שהוא גילוי יחודו יתברך, כמו שכתוב לקמן
Therefore, because they were unable to live with this feeling of self-surrender before G d, He commanded them immediately to erect for Him a Sanctuary, in which would be the Holy of Holies, wherein His presence would dwell; i.e., there His unity would be revealed, as will be explained further.5
The Alter Rebbe points out below that when one specific place is singled out as an abode for G d’s presence, despite the fact that “his glory fills the entire earth,” the uniqueness of this site lies in the revelation of G dliness which occurs there. In contrast to the rest of the world, where G d’s unity as the sole existing being stands concealed, in “the abode of G d’s presence” it is clearly apparent that “there is naught besides Him.” We thus see that the revelation of G d’s unity which the Jewish people experienced at Mount Sinai, but which they could not endure, was continued by means of the Sanctuary.
FOOTNOTES
1. See above, ch. 23.
2. Cf. Zohar III, 232a; commentary of Rabbi David Luria on Shemot Rabbah, end of ch. 3.
3. Shabbat 88b.
4. See also below, end of ch. 36.
5. Ch. 53.
-------
Rambam:
• Daily Mitzvah - Sefer Hamitzvos:
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 162
Resting on Shavuot
"And you shall proclaim on this very day that it be a holy convocation"—Leviticus 23:21.
We are commanded to rest on Shavuot, the fiftieth day following the second day of Passover, by abstaining from any creative work, with the exception of work needed for food purposes.
Resting on Shavuot
Positive Commandment 162
Translated by Berel Bell
The 162nd mitzvah is that we are commanded to refrain from doing melachah on Shavuos.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "This very day shall be celebrate as a sacred holiday."
FOOTNOTES
1.Outside of Eretz Yisrael, this mitzvah is for two days. This applies for all other Yomim Tovim as well, except for Rosh HaShanah, which lasts two days even in Eretz Yisrael.
2.Lev. 23:21.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 325
Working on Shavuot
"You shall do no manner of servile work"—Leviticus 23:21.
It is forbidden to engage in creative work -- with the exception of work needed for food purposes -- on Shavuot, the fiftieth day following the second day of Passover.
Working on Shavuot
Negative Commandment 325
Translated by Berel Bell
The 325th prohibition is that we are forbidden to perform melachah on Shavuos.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement, "No servile1 melachah may be done."
FOOTNOTES
1.This phrase, m'leches avodah, excludes those types of melachah involving food preparation. Nevertheless, there are many laws regarding the conditions necessary in order to be able to perform such a melachah. See the Shulchan Aruch for the relevant details.
________________________________________
Positive Commandment 163
Resting on Rosh Hashanah
"In the seventh month, on the first day of that month, there shall be a day of rest for you"—Leviticus 23:24.
We are commanded to rest on the first of Tishrei, Rosh Hashanah, by abstaining from any creative work, with the exception of work needed for food purposes.
Resting on Rosh Hashanah
Positive Commandment 163
Translated by Berel Bell
The 163rd mitzvah is that we are commanded to refrain from doing melachah on the first day1 of the month of Tishrei [i.e. Rosh HaShanah].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "The first day of the seventh month shall be for you Shabbason" [a day of rest.]
We have already explained3 the statement of our Sages, "The term Shabbason indicates a positive commandment."
FOOTNOTES
1.Outside of Israel, this mitzvah is for two days.
2.Lev. 23:24.
3.See P165, and footnote there.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 326
Working on Rosh Hashanah
"You shall do no servile work"—Leviticus 23:25.
It is forbidden to engage in creative work -- with the exception of work needed for food purposes -- on the first of Tishrei, Rosh Hashanah.
Working on Rosh Hashanah
Negative Commandment 326
Translated by Berel Bell
The 326th prohibition is that we are forbidden to perform melachah on Rosh HaShanah.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1, "No servile melachah may be done [on that day].
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 23:25.
________________________________________
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter: Hilchot Nizkei Mammon Chapter Six
Chapter Six
1. What is meant by the term mu'ad?1 [An animal regarding which] testimony2 was given on three [different] days. If, however, an animal gored [other animals] on one day, or it bit, lay upon, kicked or butted [other animals many] - even one hundred - times in one day, it should not be considered to be mu'ad.3
If three pairs of witnesses gave testimony [concerning an animal]4 on one day, there is an [unresolved] doubt whether it is classified as mu'ad or not.
2. The warning administered to an owner [for an animal] must be administered in the owner's presence, as [implied by Exodus 21:29]: "And the owners shall be warned." The warning must be administered in a court.5
3. When an ox belonging to a deaf mute, a mentally incompetent individual, a minor6 or a person who is overseas gores, [the owner] is not liable. The court should, however, appoint a guardian for the ox and administer the warning to the guardian.
4. [The following rules apply when this ox] causes damage after the warning was administered to the guardian:7 If the ox is still classified as a tam, an ordinary animal, half the damages must be paid from the body [of the ox].8 If a warning was administered on three [different] days, and afterwards [the ox] causes damage, the guardian must pay for the damage from the choicest properties he owns.9 When the orphans attain majority, they must enter into litigation with the guardian and repay him.
5. When oxen are used for sport,10 and they are trained to gore each other, they are not considered to be mu'adim [to gore] each other. [Moreover,] even if they kill a human, they should not be executed, for [Exodus 21:28] states: "When an ox gores...," [implying that it does so on its own initiative,] not that it was prompted to gore.
6. When an ox was sold or given away as a present after its owners had been warned, its status reverts back to that of a tam. With the change in ownership, its status changes.
If, however, an ox was borrowed or entrusted to a watchman, its status remains unchanged. Similarly, if a warning regarding an ox was given to a guardian, and then the owner who was a deaf mute regained his faculties, or the owner who was mentally incompetent regained competence, or the owner who was a minor attains majority, the status of the ox remains unchanged,11 for it remains in the domain of the [same] owner.
7. When an animal was classified as mu'ad, and then it changes its conduct, its status changes and it is considered to be a tam.
What is implied? If an ox was classified as mu'ad with regard to goring and it ceased goring, it is considered to be a tam with regard to goring, even though it still butts.
When is it considered to have ceased [goring]? When children play12 with it and it does not gore them. Similarly with regard to other tendencies regarding which warnings were given, [the status of the animal remains unchanged] until [children] play with it, and it does not do [what it was wont to do previously].
8. When an ox has been classified as mu'ad with regard to [other oxen], it is not considered to be mu'ad with regard to other types of animals. An ox that has been classified as mu'ad with regard to humans is not considered to be mu'ad with regard to animals.13 If it has been classified as mu'ad with regard to young animals, it is not considered to be mu'ad with regard to older animals.
Therefore, if it caused damage of the type regarding which the warning was given, the owner is liable for the full amount of the damages. If it caused damages of another type, regarding which a warning was not given, [the owners] must pay [only] half the damages.
If it has been classified as mu'ad with regard to Sabbaths, it is not considered to be mu'ad with regard to weekdays.14 If it causes damage on the Sabbath, the owner is liable for the full amount of the damages. During the week, [the owners] must pay [only] half the damages.
When is the warning rescinded? When children will play with it on the day concerning which the warning was given, and it does not harm them in the way it is known to cause harm.
9. If [an ox] gored another ox on one day, a donkey on the following day, and a camel on the day afterwards, it is classified as mu'ad for all [these three] types [of animals].15
[A warning should also be administered to an owner in the following situation. His ox] saw another ox on one day and gored it. On the next day, it saw another ox but did not gore it. On the third day, it saw another ox and gored it. On the fourth day, it saw another ox but did not gore it. On the fifth day, it saw another ox and gored it, and on the sixth day, it saw another ox but did not gore it. [In these circumstances, the ox] becomes classified as mu'ad to gore oxen on alternate days.16 Similar laws apply in other analogous situations.
10. [Similarly, a warning should also be administered to an owner in the following situation. His ox] saw another ox on one day and gored it. On the next day, it saw a donkey, but did not gore it. On the third day, it saw a horse and gored it. On the fourth day, it saw a camel but did not gore it. On the fifth day, it saw a mule and gored it, and on the sixth day, it saw a wild ass but did not gore it. [In these circumstances, the ox] becomes classified as mu'ad to gore all [these three] types [of animals] on alternate days.
If it gores one of these types of animals that it had gored on alternate days on a day on which it is mu'ad, [the owner must pay the full damages, as is required for an ox that is] mu'ad.
11. [When an ox] gores [an animal] on the fifteenth of one month, on the sixteenth of the following month, and on the seventeenth of the third month, it is not classified as mu'ad until it adds a day a third time, in the fourth month.17
If an ox hears a shofar blast and gores on three [successive] occasions, it is considered mu'ad [to gore after hearing] shofar blasts.18 Similar laws apply in other analogous situations.
12. [There is an unresolved doubt in the following situations.] An ox gored three other oxen on three successive days. On the fourth day it gored a donkey, and on the fifth day it gored a camel. Or at first it gored a donkey and a camel, and then it gored three oxen one after another. There is a doubt if it is classified as mu'ad only for oxen or for all three types of animals.
Similarly, if an ox gores on three successive Sabbaths and then on the Sunday and the Monday [following the third Sabbath], or it gored on Thursday, on Friday and then on three successive Sabbaths, there is a doubt whether it is classified as mu'ad only for Sabbaths or for a block of three days, two of which are ordinary weekdays.19
13. With regard to these unresolved questions and the like, [the owner of the ox] that caused the damage is required to pay for only half the damages. If the person whose property was damaged seizes property belonging to the other person equivalent to the full amount of the damages, it is not expropriated from him.20
FOOTNOTES
1. Mu'ad literally means forewarned - i.e., the animal is prone to perform such acts, and the owner should be forewarned.
2. From two acceptable witnesses.
3. For it is possible that the animal was disturbed by certain factors on that day, and its conduct is not indicative of its ordinary pattern.
4. I.e., that it gored three other animals on three days (Ra'avad, Maggid Mishneh).
5. Hilchot Sanhedrin 5:12 states that this refers to a court of three judges who received semichah. For this reason, ever since this semichah was nullified, animals were no longer placed into the category of mu'ad. Accordingly, these laws do not apply in the present age.
6. All the first three people are considered to be mentally incompetent and are not held responsible for their conduct.
7. I.e., the Rambam explains that the ox gored another ox, a guardian was appointed, and then it gored again. (See Or Sameach.)
8. Rashi (Bava Kama 39a), Rabbenu Asher and the Ra'avad differ and maintain that a guardian is not appointed unless the ox gores three times. Otherwise, the owners are not held liable.
9. The Tur (Choshen Mishpat 406) states that the payment is made from the property of the orphans, and not from that of the guardian.
10. Bava Kama 4:3 uses the expression A bull from a stadium. In his Commentary on the Mishnah, the Rambam explains This one sends out his bull and the other sends out his bull. After having trained their animals to gore, they call to them to attack the other animal to see who will be victorious. This is done with the owner's consent. This is the habit of many foolish people.
11. See Halachah 3. Although previously the guardian was responsible for watching the ox, the change in responsibility is not a change in ownership, and the ox's status is not changed.
12. Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Bava Kama 2:4). In neither source does the Rambam mention how often the children must play with the ox. With this ruling, the Rambam rejects an opinion stated in Bava Kama 23b, which states that if three days pass when the ox sees other oxen and does not gore them, the warning is rescinded.
13. Conversely, an ox that has been classified as mu'ad with regard to animals is not considered to be mu'ad with regard to humans.
14. Rashi (Bava Kama 37a) explains that on the Sabbath, an ox is not required to work. Hence, it may not feel the yoke of its master as thoroughly and may therefore cause damage. Others cite the Jerusalem Talmud which explains that since people dress differently on the Sabbath, the ox will not be familiar with them, and may gore them because it views them as strangers. This does not apply during the week.
15. Our translation is based on the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh, which reflects the Rambam's wording in Halachot 10 and 12. The Rambam is explaining that to be classified as mu'ad for a type of animal, an ox does not have to gore that type of animal three times. The Ra'avad differs and explains that the ox is considered to be mu'ad for all types of animals.
16. Thus, if it gores an ox on an odd day, its owner will be liable for the full extent of the damages, and if it gores on an even day, he will be liable for only half the damages.
17. A parallel to this law is found with regard to fixing the pattern of the onset of menstruation. See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 8:6.
18. I.e., it appears that the shofar blasts prompt the ox to gore.
19. The Ra'avad questions the Rambam's ruling, asking why the animal would be considered to be mu'ad for only this block of three days.
20. See Chapter 1, Halachah 11.
-------
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters: Shevitat Yom Tov Chapter Four, Shevitat Yom Tov Chapter Five, Shevitat Yom Tov Chapter Six
Chapter Four
Halacha 1
We may not ignite a flame from wood, from stone, or from metal - i.e., by rubbing these surfaces against each other or striking them against each other until a spark is created. Similarly, we may not shake combustible gas which resembles water and can be ignited by shaking it. [Similarly, we may not take] a clear but firm utensil or a glass filled with water and position it in the rays of the sun so that it will radiate light on flax or the like and ignite it. All these and [any] similar activities are forbidden on a holiday.
[Our Sages] permitted kindling a flame only from an existing flame. To ignite a fire is forbidden, because it is possible to ignite the fire before the holiday.1
Halacha 2
Although kindling a flame on a holiday is permitted even when there is no necessity,2 it is forbidden to extinguish a fire. [This applies] even to a fire that is necessary to be kindled for the sake of the preparation of food. For extinguishing [a flame] is a [forbidden] labor, and it is not at all necessary for the preparation of food.3
Just as one may not extinguish a fire, one may not extinguish a candle.4 A person who extinguishes [on a holiday] should be [punished by] lashes just like one who weaves or builds.
Halacha 3
It is forbidden to lift the opening of a lamp upward so that it will be extinguished, nor may one remove oil from it, nor may one cut off the top of the wick with a utensil.5 One may, however, flick the top of the wick with one's hand [to remove the charred portion].6
When a bundle of wood has been lit in a fire, it is permitted to remove any piece of wood that did not catch fire.7 This does not resemble removing oil from a lamp.
Halacha 4
It is forbidden to extinguish a fire to save one's money on a holiday, just as extinguishing it on the Sabbath is forbidden. Instead, one should abandon [the burning possessions].8
We may not extinguish a candle [so that it will be permitted to engage in] sexual relations.9 Instead, one should cover it with a utensil,10 erect a partition,11 or carry it to another room. If none of these alternatives is feasible, it is forbidden to extinguish the candle and it is forbidden to engage in relations until the candle burns out.12
Halacha 5
One may carry a candle while it is burning. [Our Sages] did not impose a decree against this lest it become extinguished. It is forbidden to place a candle on a palm tree or the like on a holiday,13 lest one come to make use of an object that is still [growing in the ground] on a holiday.
Halacha 6
We may not burn incense on a holiday, for by doing so one extinguishes.14 [This restriction applies even] when one desires to smell [its fragrance]. Surely this is true when one's intent is to impart a fragrance to one's house or one's clothes.
It is permitted to smoke produce so that it will be fit to eat, just as it is permitted to roast meat over a fire. One may sweeten mustard using a glowing piece of metal, but one may not use a piece of charred wood for that purpose, because in the process one extinguishes.15
It is forbidden to extinguish a fire so that one's food or one's house will not become smoky.16
Halacha 7
We may not blow [on a fire] with a bellows on a holiday, so that we do not follow a craftsman's practice.17 One may, however, blow with a tube.
We may not make charcoal. Nor may we braid wicks, singe them, or cut them in two with a utensil. One may, however, squeeze [a wick until it becomes firmer] by hand. [Similarly, one may] soak it in oil,18 and one may place it between two lamps [with one end in each], and light it in the middle, thus causing the wick to be divided for each of the lamps.
Halacha 8
It is forbidden to break an earthenware shard or cut a piece of papyrus over which to roast [fish].19 One may not break a reed to use as a spit with which to roast salted [meat or fish]. When a spit has become bent, fixing it is forbidden, even when one can straighten it with one's hands.20
When two utensils have been attached from the time they were originally fashioned - e.g., two lamps or two cups21 - it is forbidden to break them into two, since by doing so one makes a utensil fit for use.
Halacha 9
We may not sharpen a knife with a sharpener.22 One may, however, whet it on wood, on a shard, or on a stone. This law should not be publicized, lest [the indiscriminate] come to sharpen it using a sharpener.23
When does the above apply? When one is able to [use the knife to] cut with difficulty, or if it was nicked. If, however, one is unable to use it to cut at all, one may not even whet it on wood, lest one come to sharpen it using a sharpener.
For this reason, it is forbidden to give a knife to a sage to inspect on a holiday, lest he detect a nick and therefore forbid the use of the knife for slaughtering, and as a result the person will sharpen the knife with a sharpener. If a sage has inspected his own knife, he may lend it to an unlearned person.24
Halacha 10
We may not chop trees on a holiday using an axe, a sickle, or a saw. [One may use] only a butcher's mace,25 employing its sharp side. One may not employ its wider side, because that is like an axe.
Why did the Sages forbid using an axe and the like? So that one will not follow one's weekday practice, for it is possible for a person to chop wood on the day prior to the holiday.
Why didn't the Sages forbid chopping wood entirely? Because it is possible that a person will find a particularly thick log that will not catch fire,26 and therefore he will be prevented from cooking. Therefore, they permitted him to chop the wood in an atypical manner. In all similar instances, it was for such reasons that [the Sages] permitted whatever they permitted and forbade whatever they forbade.
Halacha 11
A woman should not walk among piles of wood to look for a branch [appropriate to use as a spit] for roasting.27 One may not support a pot or a door with a block of wood, for carrying wood on a holiday was permitted solely for the purpose of kindling.
Halacha 12
One may remove the shutters of [cabinets28 in] stores and return them on a holiday29 in order to take out spices that one needs from the store, so that one will not be prevented from [experiencing] festive joy.
When does the above apply? When the shutters have a hinge in the middle. If, however, the hinge is on the side, it is forbidden. [This is] a decree, [instituted] lest one attach it [firmly].30 If the shutters do not have hinges at all, it is permitted to return them even at home.31
Halacha 13
Utensils made of detachable parts - e.g., candelabra made up of several pieces or a chair or table made up of pieces - may be constructed on a holiday provided one does not firmly attach the pieces.32 [This is permissible] because the forbidden labor of building does not apply to utensils.
It is permitted to stack stones to use as a toilet. [Stacking them creates] only a temporary structure, and because of respect for human dignity [the Sages] did not institute any restrictions [regarding this matter].
Halacha 14
When a person who makes a fire on a holiday sets up the wood, he should not place one log on top of the other in an orderly fashion, for this looks like building. Although this is merely a temporary structure, it is forbidden.33 Instead, he should either unload all the logs in disarray, or arrange them in order using an irregular manner.
What is implied? One should place a log on top and then place another below it, and then another even lower, until one reaches the ground.
Halacha 15
Similarly, with regard to a pot, one should hold [the pot] and place the stones [to be used as a tripod] beneath it. One may not place the pot on the stones. Similarly, when erecting a bed one should hold the boards above, and place the legs under them. Even when stacking eggs, one should not stack one row above another row until one has erected a tower. Instead, one should depart from one's regular pattern and build from the top downward. Similarly, all other comparable situations require a departure from the norm.34
Halacha 16
We are permitted to remove fleas that attach themselves to the skin of an animal, although this causes a wound.35 We may not, however, deliver an animal on a holiday,36 but we may help [the mother] give birth.
What is implied? We may hold the calf so that it will not fall on the ground, blow into its nostrils,37 and place [its mother's] teat in its mouth. If it is a kosher animal and its mother has rejected it, we may pour her afterbirth over it and place a block of salt in her womb,38 so that she will respond mercifully to it. It is forbidden to do this for a non-kosher animal [that has rejected the animal which it has borne], for the activity is of no avail.39
Halacha 17
When a utensil becomes impure on the day prior to the holiday, it is forbidden to immerse it on the holiday, lest [this leniency cause him] to leave it in a state of impurity [until the holiday].40 If, however, it is necessary for the person to immerse the water in [an impure] vessel, he may immerse the vessel together with its water, without any qualms.41
It is permitted to immerse a utensil that was ritually pure with regard to terumah, so that one could use it for sacrificial foods. The same applies with regard to other immersions, which are required to ascend to a higher level of ritual purity.42
Halacha 18
When a utensil becomes impure on a holiday, it may be immersed on the holiday.43 When a utensil becomes impure as a result of contact with liquids that are a secondary source of impurity, the utensil may be immersed on the holiday, because according to Scriptural law it is ritually pure, as will be explained in the appropriate place.44
We may draw water [from a well] with a bucket that is ritually impure, although it becomes ritually pure in the process.45
A woman who is impure because of menstrual bleeding and who has no pure clothes [into which] to change [after her immersion] may act with guile and immerse herself in her clothes.46
Halacha 19
Our Sages forbade many activities on a holiday as a decree, [instituted] lest people become involved in commercial activity.47
What is implied? At the outset, one should not set a price for an animal on a holiday. Instead, one should bring two animals of equal value, and slaughter one of them and divide the meat among [the interested parties]. On the following day, the price should be established by [evaluating] the second animal. Each of the parties should pay according to the portion they took.
When these parties divide [the meat] among themselves, they should not say, "I will take a sela's worth. Take two selaim worth yourselves," for it is forbidden to mention money at all. Instead, one should take a third of the animal, another a fourth, [dividing it in fractional portions].48
Halacha 20
When they divide [the meat], they should not weigh it on a scale, for a scale should not be used at all [on a holiday].49 Indeed, when a scale is hanging, it is forbidden to place meat on it to protect [the meat] from [being taken by] mice, because it appears as if one were weighing meat on a scale.
An experienced butcher may not weigh meat by hand.50 Nor may one weigh [meat] using a container filled with water.51
We may not cast lots for portions [of meat]. We may, however, cast lots for sacrificial meat on a holiday in order to encourage endearment for the mitzvot.52
Halacha 21
A person should not tell a butcher, "Give me a dinar's worth of meat." Instead, he should say, "Give me a portion" or "...half a portion." On the following day, they should reckon its worth.
Similarly, a person should not take a [specific] measure or weight [of goods] from a storekeeper. What should he do instead? He should tell the storekeeper, "Fill this container for me," and on the following day he should pay him for its value. Even if it is a container that is used for measuring, he may fill it, provided he does not mention any [specific] measure.53
Halacha 22
A chef54 may measure spices and add them to a dish so that the food will not spoil. A housewife, by contrast, should not measure55 [the quantity of] flour [to use] for dough,56 nor should a man measure the barley groats he places before his animal. Instead, he should approximate [the appropriate amount], and give that to it.
Halacha 23
It is permitted to take a specific number of eggs and nuts from a storekeeper.57 The same is true for other similar products, provided one does not mention money or the sum of his account.
What is meant by "the sum of his account"? When a person owes [a storekeeper] for ten pomegranates or ten nuts, he should not tell him on a holiday, "Give me ten more so that I will owe you for twenty." Instead, he should take the [second ten] without any comment and make a reckoning on the following day.
Halacha 24
A person may approach a storekeeper,58 a shepherd, or a person who raises animals and with whom he frequently does business and take an animal, fowl, or anything else that he requires.59 This is permitted provided one does not mention money or the sum of his account.
Halacha 25
We may sue [for the payment of] a loan60 granted on a holiday in a court of law. For if no suit could be brought, no one would ever give [a borrower] anything, and he would be prevented from celebrating on the holiday.
Halacha 26
Although it is forbidden to separate terumah or the tithes on a holiday,61 if a person has terumah or tithes that he had separated on the previous day, he is permitted to bring them to a priest on the holiday. Needless to say, [it is permitted] to bring challah, and the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw [of an animal that is slaughtered]62 to a priest on a holiday.63
Collectors for a charitable fund may collect [food] from courtyards on holidays. They should not, however, announce [their presence] as they do during the week. Instead, they should make their appeal in a modest manner, [the donations] should be given them, and then they should distribute them to every neighborhood separately.
FOOTNOTES
1.See Chapter 1, Halachah 5. The Ra'avad differs with the rationale quoted by the Rambam. He states that a flame ignited on a holiday is forbidden because of the prohibitions of nolad, for there is no way that one could have designated it for use before the holiday.
Although the wording of Beitzah 33b appears to support the Ra'avad, the Maggid Mishneh defends the Rambam's view. He also mentions a practical difference. According to the Rambam, if one erred and ignited a flame on a holiday, it would be permissible to make use of it, while according to the Ra'avad this would be forbidden. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 502:1 and the Mishnah Berurah 502:4 permit the use of a flame that was ignited on a holiday.
2.Chapter 1, Halachah 4.
3.The Ramah follows the opinion of Rabbenu Asher and others, who state that when extinguishing a fire is necessary to provide one with food for the holidays - e.g., one's food has caught on fire - it is permitted. Although the Rambam's wording does not appear to allow for this leniency, the leniency is accepted by the later Ashkenazic authorities.
4.Although one may desire to extinguish a candle to sleep or for the reasons mentioned in Halachah 4, and doing so would thus contribute to one's holiday pleasure, it is nevertheless forbidden.
5.All these activities appear to be considered as commissions of the forbidden labor itself, and not merely Rabbinic safeguards.
6.The Ra'avad and others note that Beitzah 32b appears to indicate that it is permitted to remove the charred portion of the wick with a utensil as well. The wording of the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 514:10) leaves room for doubt with regard to which view is accepted. In practice, it is customary not to remove the charred portion of any wick - neither by hand nor with a utensil (Mishnah Berurah 514:47).
7.If, however, a piece of wood has already caught fire, it is forbidden to move it if one's intent is to extinguish it (Ramah, Orach Chayim 502:2).
8.The Ramah (Orach Chayim 514:1) allows a leniency: If a person has no other home, and sees his house being consumed by flames, he may put out the fire so that he will have a place to eat his festive meals. As mentioned in the notes on Hilchot Shabbat 12:3, it is customary at present to extinguish raging fires, because there is surely the possibility of a threat to life if they are left unchecked.
9.For it is forbidden to engage in sexual relations by the light of a candle (Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:10).
10.The intent is a utensil that will allow the candle to continue burning. It is forbidden to cover the candle with a utensil that will snuff it out.
11.This refers to an extension of a temporary partition. In such an instance, the prohibition is merely Rabbinic in origin. When the partition was opened at least a handbreadth before the commencement of the festival, there is no restriction at all (see Hilchot Shabbat 22:27).
12.Note the Chatam Sofer (Orach Chayim, Responsum 145), who questions the Rambam's intent in adding the last phrase.
13.For it is forbidden to use a tree on the Sabbath or festivals. See Hilchot Shabbat 21:6-8. From the wording of the Maggid Mishneh, it appears that, for this same reason, it is forbidden to leave a candle on a date palm before the commencement of the holiday, so that it will burn there on the holiday. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 514:6) cites this law with that emphasis.
14.Beitzah 22b states that the incense first extinguishes some of the fire onto which it was placed, and then it catches fire itself and begins to burn. One might think that this would be permitted, because it brings pleasure to people. Nevertheless, our Sages ruled that it is only pleasure that is appreciated by all people - e.g., food - for which one is permitted to perform labor on a holiday, but not pleasure appreciated by only a minority, like fragrance.
15.This restriction was instituted because it was possible - and indeed, it was usual - to do this before the holiday. Concerning other produce, one may use charred wood to sweeten it, although one temporarily extinguishes the charred wood in the process (Mishnah Berurah 511:25).
16.The Ramah (Orach Chayim 514:1) allows one to extinguish the fire if there is no other alternative to saving one's food or the place in which one desires to eat one's festive meals.
17.This is one of the restrictions instituted so that one would not follow one's ordinary weekday practice.
18.Provided the oil is not in a lamp that is lit at that time (Ramah, Orach Chayim 514:9). If this were the case, one would be removing the lamp's fuel, and that is considered to be extinguishing.
19.In Talmudic times, it was common to soak a shard or papyrus in oil and then put it under the fish as a makeshift roasting pan, to prevent the fish from becoming charred (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Beitzah 4:5).
20.The Maggid Mishneh explains the Rambam's ruling as follows: There is a difference of opinion (Beitzah 28b) between the Sages and Rabbi Yehudah whether one is allowed to perform a forbidden labor to prepare articles that are auxiliaries to cooking on a holiday. When it is possible to prepare these auxiliaries before the holiday, all opinions agree that it is forbidden to do so on the holiday. When, as in the instance of the spit that became askew on the holiday itself, and it is only on the holiday that the auxiliary can be made fit for use, the Sages forbid doing so; Rabbi Yehudah maintains that this is permitted.
The Maggid Mishneh maintains that the Rambam rules according to the Sages' position. Others maintain that he accepts Rabbi Yehudah's view, but rules stringently because the Talmud states that one should not publicize the fact that the halachah follows Rabbi Yehudah.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 509:1) quotes the Rambam's ruling verbatim. The Ramah states that if it is impossible to use the spit at all while it is crooked, it may be straightened. He states, however, that this ruling should not publicized.
21.Potters would usually fashion cups and lamps in pairs and then break them in half before using them (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, loc. cit.:4).
22.In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 3:7), the Rambam defines a sharpener as a grinding stone.
23.Beitzah 28a associates this law with the difference of opinion between Rabbi Yehudah and the Sages mentioned in the notes on the previous halachah. There is, however, a difference of interpretation among the commentaries regarding the definition of these respective positions.
The Maggid Mishneh, who maintains that the Rambam does not accept Rabbi Yehudah's position at all, explains that this ruling follows the Sages' view. The Kessef Mishneh clarifies that according to this position, whetting the knife on wood or a shard is not considered grinding at all, and it is therefore permitted.
Others, however, explain that the Rambam is quoting the Talmud's view that accepts Rabbi Yehudah's position, but that the Rambam does not desire that the ruling be publicized. According to this view, even Rabbi Yehudah would not allow a knife to be sharpened using a sharpener, because this is a mundane activity, or for other similar reasons. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 509:2) quotes the Rambam's ruling verbatim.
24.Needless to say, he himself may use it to slaughter. In Talmudic times, it was customary for a slaughterer to have a sage inspect his knife before using it. At present, the practice is that every slaughterer inspects his own knife. The inspection should be carried out before the holiday. If, however, this was not done, a slaughterer may inspect his knife on a holiday (Ramah, Orach Chayim 498:1).
25.Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 4:3). The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 501:1) states that at present, we are not certain what is meant by a butcher's mace. Hence, it is forbidden to chop wood with anything other than a knife.
26.The Maggid Mishneh states that one might infer from the Rambam's wording that it is forbidden to chop any wood that would burn without being chopped. This law is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:2).
27.Since it was not designated for that purpose on the previous day, its use is forbidden on the holiday (Maggid Mishneh, quoting the Rashba). Although our Sages allowed wood to be carried for the purpose of kindling without being designated before the holiday, this leniency was applied for that reason alone. When one desires to use wood for another purpose, one must designate it before the commencement of the holiday (Rabbenu Nissim, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 502:8).
28.This addition is made according to the interpretation of the Rashba (Beitzah 11b). Rashi interprets the term to be referring to the shutters of storefronts. Even according to his interpretation, this does not refer to a building attached to the ground.
29.Even though returning the shutter to its place is not for the sake of festive joy, our Sages permitted this, because otherwise the storekeepers would not desire to open their shops and run the risk of their wares being stolen (Beitzah 11b).
30.This would make one liable for building (Hilchot Shabbat 10:13). Most commentaries explain that the hinges cannot fit tightly. Rav Kapach, noting the Arabic wording used by the Rambam in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 1:5), interprets this as referring to nailing the two entities together permanently.
31.See Hilchot Shabbat 22:25, which states that the doors of cabinets, chests, and the like, which are on hinges, may be removed on the Sabbath but may not be put back in place.
32.On the Sabbath, our Sages imposed a decree on this activity (ibid.:26), but not on the holidays.
33.Lest one come to erect a permanent structure on a holiday.
34.The Maggid Mishneh permits placing a board over the legs of the table. Although Rav Yosef Karo takes issue regarding this matter in the Kessef Mishneh, in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 315:3) he permits erecting a table in this manner on the Sabbath.
35.Since the person has no intention of causing a wound (his intent is merely to remove the fleas), this is not prohibited [Beitzah 23a; Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 2:7)]. It is, however, forbidden to comb an animal with an iron comb, for this will surely remove its hair, and is hence forbidden (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 523:2).
36.In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 18:3), the Rambam explains that this refers to pulling the calf out from the mother, for this involves extra effort.
37.To remove the fluids clogging them.
38.Shabbat 128b states that the pain that the mother will suffer will cause her to react mercifully to her young.
39.Once a non-kosher animal has rejected her young, she will never accept it again (ibid.).
40.It is possible that a person will be very involved with festive preparations before the holiday, and desire to leave the immersion of the vessel for the holiday, when he will be less pressured.
This reason is mentioned by Rav Bibi (Beitzah 18a). Significantly, another rationale for this prohibition is given there - that of Ravva, who explains the reason is that one appears to be making a utensil fit for use on the holiday. The commentaries note that in Hilchot Shabbat 23:8, the Rambam quotes Ravva's view and question why he offers a different rationale here.
Among the resolutions offered is that on the holidays there is no prohibition against preparing a utensil for use if it is necessary for the preparation of food. On the Sabbath, by contrast, this is forbidden.
41.Although this immersion also purifies the vessel in which the water is contained, there is no difficulty.
42.See Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTum'ah 13:2, which explains that although a person immersed himself with the intent of partaking of terumah, he is considered impure and is required to immerse himself again if he desires to partake of meat from the sacrificial offerings. In particular, there are five levels of purity: a person who desires to partake of unconsecrated articles in a state of ritual purity, a person who desires to partake of ma'aser sheni, a person who desires to partake of terumah, a person who desires to partake of sacrificial foods, and one who desires to take part in the burning of the red heifer.
43.For there was no opportunity to immerse it before the holiday.
44.As explained in Hilchot Sha'ar Avot Hatum'ah 7:1-2, when a liquid comes in contact with a primary source of impurity, it becomes impure. According to Scriptural law, contact with this impure liquid does not cause an object to contract ritual impurity. Nevertheless, our Sages decreed that foods and utensils that come in contact with this impure liquid should be considered impure.
The Rambam explains that since the impurity is Rabbinic in origin, our Sages did not forbid immersing this utensil on a holiday so that it could be used in a state of purity. Rabbi Mordechai HaCohen and the Rashba note that Beitzah, loc. cit., offers a different rationale, and they question why the Rambam deviates from the source. The later commentaries, however, justify the Rambam's position.
45.When the bucket is immersed in the well, the bucket becomes ritually pure. This is permitted, because it is not obvious to an observer that the person is immersing the utensil.
46.To emerge from the state of impurity, the woman must immerse herself; this is permitted on a holiday. She is, however, forbidden to immerse her clothes. Nevertheless, if she has no other pure clothes to wear, our Sages offered her an alternative. She can immerse herself while wearing her clothes, thus causing them to become ritually pure.
For her immersion to be acceptable, her clothes must be loose fitting, so that they will not prevent the water from penetrating to her skin.
47.As the Rambam explains (Hilchot Shabbat 23:12), the Sages forbade commercial activity on the Sabbath lest one write. The rulings regarding the holidays are somewhat more lenient than on the Sabbath, in order to allow one to purchase food for the holiday, but as a whole the prohibition remains in force.
48.The Ramah (Orach Chayim 500:1) states that it is permitted to enter into such a partnership agreement on a holiday only with a Jew, but not with a gentile.
49.The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 500:2) states that it is forbidden to weigh meat even to know how much to use when cooking.
50.I.e., an experienced butcher is able to approximate the weight of a portion of meat by holding it in his hands.
51.By measuring the amount of water the piece of meat displaces, one will be able to determine its weight.
52.Shabbat 149b, the source for this halachah, states that one should not cast lots "for portions of חול." Rashi, the Ra'avad, and others interpret this to refer to portions of sacrificial meat that were offered during the week. The Rambam, by contrast, interprets this to refer to non-sacrificial meat.
53.This represents a reversal of the Rambam's ruling in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 3:8). This change in thinking appears to result from the Rambam's understanding of Rav Yitzchak Alfasi's rulings with regard to Beitzah 29a, the Talmudic passage on which this halachah is based (Rav Kapach). (See also the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh.)
54.The Maggid Mishneh states that this does not apply only to a chef, but to anyone. Why does Beitzah 29a, the source for this halachah, mention a chef? Because "the Sages spoke about commonplace events."
Why is a person granted this leniency? Because if he does not use the proper amount of spices, he will spoil the flavor of the food he is preparing. In the other instances mentioned in this halachah, the person will not suffer a loss from making an approximation.
Rav David Arameah differs, and explains that this law applies only to a chef, for his professional reputation depends on even a slight deviation from the desired flavor. An ordinary person, by contrast, will not be inordinately upset if the flavor is affected slightly, because he uses a slightly larger or smaller amount of spices.
Although the Tur follows Rav David Arameah's view, when quoting this law the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 504:4) mentions "a person," rather than a chef.
55.The reason for this and the following prohibition is that it appears that the person is measuring the flour or the barley for the purpose of selling it.
56.For the dough will not spoil if one errs in his approximation of the proper amount to use.
57.This is permitted because even at home a person will ask for a specific number of eggs or nuts, so that he will not have more or fewer than he requires.
58.Although these laws would also apply to a storekeeper, many suggest that this word should be omitted from the text, because it is not found in Beitzah 29b, the source for this halachah. Authoritative manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah do not contain this word.
59.The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 517:1) states that this applies only when the storekeeper is Jewish. If he is non-Jewish, we may not take anything that might have been harvested or snared on the holiday.
60.We are not speaking about a loan of money, but rather food that was given in lieu of payment.
61.See Hilchot Shabbat 23:15.
62.These portions must be given to a priest whenever an animal is slaughtered. (See Deuteronomy 18:3; Hilchot Bikkurim 9:1.)
63.Indeed, there is no prohibition against separating these portions on a festival itself, since they are not forbidden to common people, nor is it necessary to immerse oneself before partaking of them (Maggid Mishneh). (See also Chapter 3, Halachah 8 and notes.)
Chapter Five
Halacha 1
Although the Torah allowed carrying on a holiday even when it is not necessary [for the preparation of food], one should not carry heavy loads as he is accustomed to do on a weekday; instead, he must depart [from his regular practice].1 If, however, making such a departure is impossible, it is permitted.
What is implied? A person who brings jugs of wine from one place to another place should not bring them in a basket or in a container. Instead, he should carry them on his shoulder or in front of him. A person who is carrying hay should not sling the bale over his shoulder. Instead, he should carry it in his hands.
Halacha 2
Similarly, loads that a person might ordinarily carry with a pole should be carried on his back. Those that are ordinarily carried on one's back should be carried on one's shoulder. And those that one usually carries on one's shoulder should be carried in one's hands before him, or a cloth should be spread over them. Similarly, one should depart from one's ordinary practice with regard to carrying loads. If it is impossible to depart from one's ordinary practice,2 one may bring the load in the ordinary manner.
When does the above apply? When a person is carrying the burden. If, however, an animal is carrying the burden, one should not bring them at all, so that one does not follow one's weekday practice.3
Halacha 3
We may not direct an animal with a staff, nor may a blind man go out with a cane,4 nor may a shepherd carry his pack.5
Neither a man nor a woman may be carried out in a chair, so that the ordinary weekday practice will not be followed. A person whose presence is required by many6 may be carried out on a chair on another person's back. Similarly, he may be carried out in a litter, even on people's shoulders.
Halacha 4
We may not move a ladder used for a dovecote7 from one dovecote to another in the public domain, lest [an observer] say, "He is moving [the ladder] to fix his roof."
It is, however, permitted to move such a ladder in a private domain. Although all the restrictions instituted by the Sages because of the impression that might be made on an onlooker normally apply even in the most private places, leniency was granted in this instance [to increase] rejoicing on the holiday.8
Halacha 5
A person who has [left] produce [to dry] on his roof and who must move it from one place to another9 should not pass it from one roof to another roof - even if both roofs are of the same height - nor should he lower it by a rope from a window or carry it down a ladder. [These restrictions were instituted] so that he will not follow his ordinary practice. He may, however, throw it down through an aperture, [thus moving it] from place to place on one roof.10
If one slaughters an animal in a field,11 one should not carry it to the city [hanging from] a small or large pole. Instead, one should carry [its meat] limb by limb.12
Halacha 6
On a holiday it is permitted to send a colleague13 any article from which one could benefit on a weekday, even though one cannot benefit from it on a holiday - e.g., tefillin. Needless to say, one may send [a colleague] articles from which one may benefit on the holiday itself - e.g., wine, oil, and fine flour.14
When, however, one could not derive benefit from an article on a weekday unless one performed a task whose performance is forbidden on a holiday, one may not send that article to a colleague on a holiday.15
Halacha 7
What is implied? One may not send grain, because one does not benefit from it on a weekday unless one grinds it,16 and it is forbidden to grind on a holiday. We may, by contrast, send legumes, since one may cook them on a holiday or roast them, and eat them.
We may send a beast, a domestic animal, or a fowl on a holiday even when alive, because it is permitted to slaughter them on a holiday.17 The same rules apply in other similar situations.
Halacha 8
When one sends a colleague as a present any article that is permitted to be sent on a holiday, one should not send it with a delegation.18 A delegation includes at least three people.
What is implied? When one sends a colleague animals or wines with a group of three people who walk together, or four who walk one after the other, and they all walk in a single line,19 this is forbidden, so that one does not follow one's weekday procedure.20It is permitted, however, to send three different types [of articles] with three people who walk together.
Halacha 9
When a person establishes an eruv t'chumim for a holiday, his animal, his articles, and his produce are bound by the same restrictions as he is.21 They also may not be taken beyond two thousand cubits in all directions from the place where the person established his eruv.
Halacha 10
[The holiday limits] of ownerless articles follow the limits of those who acquire them.22 [The holiday limits] of articles belonging to a gentile are determined by their place [at the commencement of the holiday]. They are granted [only] two thousand cubits in all directions from this place.23 This is a decree. [Our Sages placed restrictions on articles] belonging to gentiles, because of articles belonging to Jews.
When produce was taken beyond [the holiday limits] and returned - even if this was done with a conscious intent to violate the prohibitions involved - there is no prohibition against moving it throughout [the holiday limits]. It is considered analogous to a person who was forcibly taken beyond [the holiday limits] and forcibly returned.24
Halacha 11
When a person entrusts an animal to his son, [the holiday limits] of the animal follow those of the father.25 If he entrusts [an animal] to a shepherd, even if he gives it to him on a holiday,26 its [holiday limits] follow those of the shepherd. If he entrusts it to two shepherds, its [holiday limits] follow those of the owner, since neither acquired [responsibility for it beforehand].27
Halacha 12
When a person invites guests on a holiday, [the guests] should not carry the portions [of food they were given] to a place where their host may not go himself. For the [holiday limits] of [the food served at] the feast depend on those of the host, and not on those of the guests.28 [These restrictions apply] unless [the host] granted [the guests] their portions [as presents via] another individual29 before the commencement of the holiday.
Halacha 13
Similarly, when produce belonging to a person was left in another city for safekeeping, and the inhabitants of that city established an eruv [t'chumim] so that they could visit [the owner], they should not bring him his produce. For his produce [is governed by the same laws] as he is,30 even though it was [entrusted] to people who established an eruv [t'chumim].
When does the above apply? When the people to whom the produce was entrusted have designated a corner of their property for it.31 If, however, they did not designate [a place for the produce], its [holiday limits] follow those of the people to whom it was entrusted.32
Halacha 14
[The holiday limits of the water in] a cistern belonging to one person follow those of the owner.33 If a cistern is owned by a city, [the holiday limits of its water] follow those of the inhabitants of the city.34 [The holiday limits of the water in a cistern made] for the festive pilgrims coming from Babylon, which is donated to the public at large, follow those of the person who draws the water.35 Whoever draws water may carry it wherever he is allowed to proceed.
[The holiday limits of the water in] springs that flow freely follow those of all people.36 Even if [the water] flows from outside the [holiday] limits within those limits, we may draw water from [such springs] on the Sabbath.37 Needless to say, this is permitted on a holiday.
Halacha 15
[The holiday limits of] an ox belonging to a herder follow those of the inhabitants of his city.38 [The holiday limits of] an ox fattened for slaughter follow those of the person who purchased it with the intention of slaughtering it on the holiday [even if he lives outside the city]. [This leniency was granted] because the fact that it was fattened for slaughter makes its reputation well known, and many come to purchase it [even from afar].
Similarly, if the owner slaughtered [such an ox] on a holiday and sold its meat [to many different people], each of the purchasers may bring the meat to any place where he is allowed to proceed himself. [The reason for this leniency is] that on the day before the holiday, [the ox's] owner had the intent that people from [surrounding] villages would purchase [its meat]. Therefore, this ox is comparable to a well designated for festive pilgrims, [the water of] which is provided to the public at large.
Halacha 16
[The holiday limits of] a coal follow those of its owners,39 and not those of a person who borrows it. [Those of] a flame, by contrast, follow those of the person carrying it.40 Therefore, a person who lights a lamp or a piece of wood [from] a colleague's [flame] may carry it to any place where he is permitted to proceed himself.
Halacha 17
When on the day prior to a holiday, a person [secures] a colleague's [consent] to lend him a utensil, [on the holiday, the holiday limits of] the utensil follow those of the borrower, even when [the owner] did not give him the utensil until [after the commencement of] the holiday.41
When a person borrows a utensil on the holiday, even if he always borrows this utensil from [its owner] on a holiday, [the holiday limits of the utensil] follow those of the owner.42
Halacha 18
When [before a holiday commences] two people both [arrange to] borrow the same cloak [from a person on the holiday], one [asks] to borrow it on the morning and the other [asks] to borrow it towards evening, [the holiday limits] of this [cloak] are dependent on those of both borrowers.43 They may not bring it to a place other than one to which they both may proceed.
Halacha 19
What is implied? If the first established an eruv [t'chumim] that was one thousand cubits to the east of the cloak, and the other established an eruv that was five hundred cubits to the west of the cloak, when the first person takes the cloak he may move it no more than one thousand five hundred cubits to the east of the cloak's present location. For this is the end of the holiday limits to which the person who established his eruv to the west may proceed.
When the second person takes the cloak, he may move it no more than one thousand cubits to the east of the cloak's present location. For this is the end of the holiday limits to which the person who established his eruv to the east may proceed.
Based on the above, if one person established his eruv two thousand cubits to the east of the cloak and the other established his eruv two thousand cubits to the west [of the cloak], they may not move it from its place.44
Halacha 20
Similarly, when a woman borrows water or salt from a friend to use in the kneading of dough or in the preparation of food, [the holiday limits of] the dough or the food are dependent on those of both women.45
By the same token, if two people purchased an animal in partnership and slaughtered it on a holiday, [the holiday limits of] the meat are dependent on those of both [partners]. If, by contrast, they purchased a jug [of wine] in partnership, and divided it on the holiday, [the holiday limits of] each partner's portion follow those of [its owner].
[What is the difference between these two laws? In the latter instance,] since the [prohibition against going beyond the holiday] limits is Rabbinic in origin,46 the principle of b'reirah applies. Thus, it is considered as if the portion that is given to [either partner] were distinct and separated as his in the jug before the holiday; [i.e.,] it is as if [the two portions of wine] were not mixed with [the other].47
This cannot be said with regard to an animal. Even if the portion that was given to [either partner] were considered to be separated within the animal, and it is as if it were distinct [leniency cannot be shown in this instance]. For the portion derived nurture from the portion belonging to the other colleague while the animal was alive, since all of an animal's limbs derive nurture from each other. Thus, all the animal's limbs are considered as being intermingled with the portions belonging to both partners. Therefore, [the holiday limits of the animal] are dependent on both of them.48
FOOTNOTES
1.Rashi (Beitzah 29b) explains that this restriction applies even to foods that are necessary for the holiday. The reason for this stringency is that a person carrying large loads appears to be going about his weekday affairs without awareness of the holiday.
Rashi [cited by the Ramah (Orach Chayim 510:8)] also states that these restrictions apply only in the public domain. Within a courtyard or a home, one may carry in one's ordinary fashion. Rav Kapach explains that this is also the Rambam's view, for (although it is not explicitly stated) the entire chapter speaks about passage through the public domain.
2.As an example, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 510:10) cites an instance where a person has invited many guests and must bring food for them promptly. Therefore, instead of requiring him to bring smaller loads that would take more time, he is allowed to bring a larger amount in his usual fashion.
3.The Maggid Mishneh states that other opinions explain that it is forbidden to use an animal on a holiday, just as it is forbidden to do so on the Sabbath, lest one break a branch of a tree. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 495:12 accepts this view as binding.
4.This refers to a blind man who uses a cane to tap his way. By contrast, a person who needs a cane to walk may use a cane on a holiday (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 522:3).
5.Carrying a pack in this way appears as an act of disrespect for the holiday (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 522:1; Mishnah Berurah 522:2).
6.Beitzah 25b interprets this as referring to a sage who lectures to the people.
7.I.e., this type of ladder is mentioned in contrast to a ladder leading to a loft, which may not be carried on Sabbaths and holidays, because it is considered a permanent part of the structure of a building and not a utensil (Hilchot Shabbat 26:7).
8.The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's interpretation of Beitzah 9a. According to the Ra'avad, an even greater leniency is in place, and it is permitted to carry such a ladder even in the public domain (for the ladders used for dovecotes could be distinguished from other ladders). The Ra'avad's view is cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 518:4).
9.E.g., he sees rain coming, which will spoil the produce (Rashi, Beitzah 35b).
10.Our translation is based on the explanation in the D'rishah of the interpretation of the Rambam's statements provided by the Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 521). The Beit Yosef maintains that the Rambam, unlike Rashi, loc. cit. and the Tur, forbids bringing the produce indoors in this manner. Others, however, interpret the Rambam's words as meaning: "One may throw them down the aperture, even though this involves moving them from place to place..."
11.The Mishnah (Beitzah 3:3) mentions this law with regard to an animal that is sick and is slaughtered before it dies. The Rambam, however, explains that the law applies in all instances, even when the animal is healthy (Maggid Mishneh).
12.Although this involves greater effort (for one will have to return to the field several times), it is preferable, so that one departs from his ordinary practice.
13.As the Ramah (Orach Chayim 516:3) emphasizes, it is permissible to send these presents in the public domain. For since sending and receiving these articles increases one's festive joy, there is no prohibition against their transfer.
14.See the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), which permits sending clothing, although it is unfinished, provided it is fit to use for some purpose in its present state.
15.According to the Rambam, it would appear that the reason for this prohibition is not that it involves the forbidden labor of transferring articles, since, as he states in Chapter 1, Halachah 4, this activity is permitted even when no benefit can be derived on the holiday itself. Rather, the reason is - as in the previous halachot - so that one will not conduct oneself in a weekday manner on a holiday.
Significantly, the Magen Avraham 516:1 and the Turei Zahav 516:1 associate this prohibition with the forbidden labor of transferring articles. Therefore, they explain, when a city has an eruv constructed, it is permitted to send such articles on a holiday as well. (See the discussion of this law in the Mishnah Berurah 516:4.)
[Significantly, in Hilchot Eruvin 8:4, the Rambam mentions the establishment of an eruv t'chumim on a holiday, but he does not mention the establishment of an eruv chatzerot on a holiday at all.]
16.There are certain people who eat roasted grains. Therefore, there is a minority opinion in Beitzah 14b that allows grain to be sent on a holiday. Nevertheless, since this is not a widely prevalent practice, this view was not accepted by the majority of Sages.
17.This leniency applies even when one knows that the recipient will not slaughter them on the holiday (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 516:1; Mishnah Berurah 516:1).
18.Since this prohibition was instituted as an expression of respect for the holiday, it applies even in a courtyard and a private domain if there are many people there (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 516:6; Mishnah Berurah 516:6).
19.The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 516:2) uses slightly different wording: "Three people or more, one after the other." There are versions of the Mishneh Torah which also use such wording.
20.Rashi (Beitzah 14b) states that by sending the articles in this manner, it appears that one is taking them to the market to be sold.
21.A person is forbidden to proceed more than 2000 cubits in any direction from his location at the onset of the Sabbath or a holiday. If he is in a private domain or in an enclosed city, the 2000-cubit limit begins from that area's peripheries.
Our Sages offered an additional leniency: a person can establish a location within his Sabbath limits as his place for the Sabbath or a holiday by depositing food at that location before the onset of the Sabbath or the holiday. This is referred to as an eruv t'chumim. In this instance, his 2000-cubit limits are calculated from that place, and not from the place where he is located at the onset of the Sabbath.
In this halachah, the Rambam is stating that the restriction against proceeding beyond 2000 cubits applies not only to the person himself, but to the possessions he owns. For them as well, the 2000-cubit limit is calculated from the location of the food he deposited.
[The Rambam does not mention this concept with regard to the Sabbath, since it is forbidden to carry articles or to lead an animal on that day. There are, nevertheless, ramifications of this law with regard to the Sabbath. The Ramah (Orach Chayim 305:23) states that it is permitted to entrust one's animals to a gentile shepherd to watch, even though one knows that he will lead them beyond the Sabbath limits. The commentaries explain that since the Jew himself neither performs nor initiates the activity, there is no prohibition.]
22.I.e., they may be carried within a 2000-cubit radius beginning from the place where the person who acquires them was located at the commencement of the Sabbath, or from the place where he deposited his eruv t'chumim.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam on this point and maintains that the Sabbath limits are calculated from the place where the article itself was located at the commencement of the Sabbath. Nevertheless, the later authorities, including the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 401:1), follow the Rambam's view.
23.For this reason, our Sages placed several restrictions on benefitting from articles brought by gentiles on a holiday, lest they have brought them from beyond the holiday limits.
24.A person who left his Sabbath or holiday limits and returned is allowed to walk only within a square of four cubits by four cubits (Hilchot Shabbat 27:12-13). These restrictions are not placed on a utensil. A person is capable of acting on his own initiative, while a utensil must be carried by a person. It is thus comparable to a person who was taken from and returned to his Sabbath limits by force. As stated in Hilchot Shabbat (ibid.), it is considered as if he had never departed. Nevertheless, as reflected in Hilchot Shabbat 6:24, if the produce was taken from the city by a Jew with a conscious intent to violate the law, one should not benefit from it on the holiday.
25.Because the father does not expect his son to take responsibility for the animal, it is not considered as having entered the son's possession (Maggid Mishneh). Although the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 397:4) follows the Rambam's ruling, there are later authorities who differ. (See Mishnah Berurah 397:10.)
26.The Mishnah Berurah 397:12 explains that the rationale is that we assume that even before the commencement of the holiday he had the intention of entrusting it to the shepherd. As the Mishnah Berurah mentions, other authorities differ with this ruling when there is more than one shepherd in a city and the owner does not also entrust his sheep to the same one, because it is not clear - even in the owner's mind - to which shepherd he will entrust his animal.
27.In this instance as well, although the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:5) quotes the Rambam's ruling, many later authorities differ. They maintain that this applies only when a person entrusted the animal to the shepherds on the holiday. If he entrusted it to them before the holiday, they are responsible, and the animal may be taken only within an area in which they both may walk (Mishnah Berurah 397:13).
28.Since the food belonged to the host at the beginning of the holiday, the holiday limits in which it may be carried are dependent on him. Although he gives the guests permission to take portions of the food home, they may not take the food beyond the limits in which it could originally be carried.
29.I.e., he must give another person the portions of food, and he will acquire them on behalf of each of the guests (Rashi, Beitzah 40a).
30.And he did not establish an eruv.
31.In such an instance, it is as if that corner were loaned to the owner of the produce. The people to whom the article was entrusted, however, are not held responsible for it. Therefore, the status of the produce depends on the owner.
32.For they are responsible for the article.
33.I.e., the water may be brought only to a place to which the owner of the cistern is permitted to proceed.
34.The Mishnah Berurah 397:34 interprets this as follows: If an inhabitant of the city draws the water, he may carry it as far as he is permitted to proceed himself, even if he extended his holiday limits by establishing an eruv t'chumim. If a person who does not live in the city draws the water, he may carry it only within the city itself.
35.Since the water is left for all travelers without distinction, its status is comparable to that of the ownerless articles mentioned in Halachah 10. (For that reason, the Ra'avad, who raises an objection to that halachah, also objects here.)
36.Seemingly, the intent of the latter phrase is the same as "those of the person who draws the water." [Indeed, Rabbenu Asher and the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 397:15) use the phrase, "those of the person who draws the water."] One wonders why the Rambam uses different wording.
37.Since the water continuously flows and does not stay in a single place, there is no place that is considered to have been established as its "place" for the Sabbath or holiday.
38.The herder raises oxen for slaughter. Nevertheless, the oxen he raises are not unique, and he cannot expect them to attract the attention of people beyond his immediate area. For that reason, their holiday limits are confined to those of their owner's town.
39.A coal is considered to be an object with substance. Therefore, the laws that govern all other articles pertain to it as well.
40.For a flame, by contrast, has no substance, and is therefore not considered to be an article that belongs to a person and is subject to his holiday limits.
41.A borrower does not become responsible for an object until he performs a formal kinyan (contractual act). Nevertheless, since the owner consented to give the borrower the article before the commencement of the holiday, with regard to the law at hand it is considered as if it were already in the borrower's possession (Mishnah Berurah 397:26).
42.It is at the commencement of the holiday that the holiday limits of a utensil are established. Since the owner did not consent to give the utensil to the borrower before this time, the utensil's limits still depend on its owner. The fact that he frequently lends the article to the borrower is of no halachic significance. Since the borrower did not ask for the article before the holiday began, the owner could have assumed that he had found another person from whom to borrow it.
43.Since the owner of the cloak agreed to let both of the borrowers use it before the holiday began, they both figure in the determination of the holiday limits of the cloak.
44.For by moving it to either direction, one will be taking it beyond the holiday limits of one of the people to whom it is entrusted.
45.Since the ingredients belonged to both women at the commencement of the holiday, the holiday limits of the dough or the food made from them are dependent on those of both women.
46.In Hilchot Shabbat, Chapter 27, the Rambam explains that the concept of Sabbath limits has its origins in the Torah itself. Nevertheless, according to the Torah, it is permitted to proceed twelve mil from one's place. The restriction of two thousand cubits is Rabbinic in origin.
47.Therefore, each of the partners is allowed to take his portion with him throughout his own holiday limits without worrying about his partner's circumstances.
48.This represents the opinion of Rav (Beitzah 37b). The Talmud, however, records the opinion of other Sages who differ and maintain that there is no difference between the laws pertaining to an animal and those pertaining to wine.
In the debate concerning this manner, two of the other Sages, Rav Kahana and Rav Assi, asked Rav: There is another relevant prohibition, that of muktzeh, for each of the partners diverted his attention from the portion designated for the other. Nevertheless, although the portions of meat belonging to each of the partners derived nurture from each other, none of the Sages thought of applying the prohibition of muktzeh for that reason.
Rav did not reply. This has led some authorities (see the gloss of Rav Moshe HaCohen, Tur, Orach Chayim 397) to the conclusion that Rav conceded and retracted his position. According to these views, the meat belonging to each partner may be taken throughout his holiday limits. Others (including the Rambam) maintain that Rav's inability to reply at that time does not represent a retraction of his position. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 397:10) follows the Rambam's ruling. Nevertheless, the Be'ur Halachah 397 states that if there is a necessity, it is possible to rely on the more lenient view.
Chapter Six
Halacha 1
When a holiday falls on Friday, on the holiday that precedes the Sabbath we may not bake or cook the food that will be eaten on the Sabbath. This prohibition is Rabbinic in origin,1 so that one will not prepare food on a holiday for a subsequent weekday.2 For a person will make the deduction: Since he is not [allowed to] cook for the Sabbath [on a holiday], surely, [he may not cook] for a weekday.
Therefore, a person who prepares a portion of food on the day prior to the holiday, and he relies on it, is permitted to cook and bake for the Sabbath on the holiday. The portion of food on which he relies is referred to as an eruv tavshilin.
Halacha 2
Why is this called an eruv? [Because it creates a distinction.] The eruv3 that is established in courtyards and lanes on the day before the Sabbath is intended to create a distinction - so that people will not think that it is permitted to transfer articles from one domain to another on the Sabbath.
Similarly, this portion of food creates a distinction and a reminder, so that people do not think that it is permitted to bake food on a holiday that will not be eaten on that day. Therefore, the portion of food is referred to as an eruv tavshilin.4
Halacha 3
The [minimum] measure of an eruv tavshilin is a portion of food the size of an olive. This suffices both for a single person and for a thousand.
This eruv may not be established with bread,5 with cereal, or the like.6 Instead, a portion of cooked food that is served together with bread - e.g., meat, fish, eggs, and the like - must be used. [Nevertheless, one need not set aside a portion of choice food.7] Even lentils [left] at the bottom of the pot [are sufficient].8 Moreover, one may even rely on the fat that is left on the knife used to cut roast meat. If an amount the size of an olive is left when one scrapes it off, one may use it for an eruv tavshilin.9
Halacha 4
With regard to such an eruv, the term "cooked food"10 also includes food that was roasted, stewed, pickled, or smoked. Even small fish that are prepared to be eaten by pouring hot water over them11 can be relied upon [for an eruv tavshilin].
Halacha 5
This eruv must be accessible until one has baked all that one must bake, cooked all that one must cook, and heated all the water one requires [for the Sabbath].12 If the eruv is eaten, lost, or burned before one has cooked or baked [for the Sabbath], one may no longer bake, cook, or heat water, except what one requires for the holiday.13
If one has already begun [kneading] a dough or [preparing] a portion of food, and the eruv is eaten or lost, one may complete the preparation [of this loaf or portion].14
Halacha 6
When a person sets aside an eruv tavshilin so that he and others may rely on it, he must grant others a portion as one grants them a portion with regard to the eruvin employed on the Sabbath.15
Whoever is allowed to acquire a portion [on behalf of others] with regard to the eruvin of the Sabbath,16 may acquire a portion [on their behalf] with regard to an eruv tavshilin. Conversely, whoever is not allowed to acquire a portion [for others] with regard to those eruvin17 may not acquire a portion [for them] with regard to this [eruv].
Halacha 7
It is not necessary to notify the others whom one grants a portion [in the eruv] before the commencement of the holiday.18 However, they must know that someone has granted them a portion and established an eruv before they rely on it for cooking and baking. Even if they did not receive notification until the holiday itself, they are permitted [to rely on it].
A person may establish an eruv on behalf of all [the inhabitants of] a city,19 and all those within its [holiday] limits.20 On the following day, he may announce, "Whoever did not establish an eruv tavshilin may rely on my eruv."21
Halacha 8
A person who establishes an eruv is required to recite [the following] blessing:22 "Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the Universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and has commanded us concerning the mitzvah of eruv."
[At this time,] he should say: "With this eruv, I will be permitted to bake and to cook tomorrow23 on the holiday24 for the Sabbath." If he includes others in the eruv, he should say "...for me, and for so and so, and so and so...," or "for all the inhabitants of the city to bake and cook on the holiday for the Sabbath."
Halacha 9
When a person did not establish an eruv himself, and others did not include him in [their eruvin], just as he is forbidden to cook and bake, his flour and his food are forbidden [to be used on the holiday]. It is thus forbidden for another person who himself established [an eruv] to cook or to bake for the person who did not establish [an eruv, using provisions belonging to the person who did not establish an eruv], unless he transfers ownership25 of his food [to the person who established an eruv].26
[If this transfer is made, such an arrangement is permitted, because the person who established an eruv] is cooking and baking [with] his own [provisions], for their ownership was transferred [to him]. If, afterwards, the person [who established an eruv] desires, he may give [this food] as a present to the person who did not establish [an eruv].
Halacha 10
When a person did not establish an eruv tavshilin and cooked and baked [food] to eat on [the holiday], and there was [food] left over, or he invited quests and they did not come, he may eat the remainder on the following day. If, however, he acted with guile27[with regard to this matter], he is forbidden to partake [of this food].
If the person transgressed28 and cooked and baked [on the holiday] for the Sabbath without establishing an eruv tavshilin], it is not forbidden [for him to partake of it]. Why did [our Sages] judge a person with guile more severely than a person who willfully transgresses, [imposing] prohibitions [on the former and not on the latter]? Because if leniency were granted to a person who acts with guile, everyone would act with guile, and the entire concept of eruv tavshilin would be forgotten.29 To violate [Torah law] consciously, by contrast, is a rare phenomenon, and the fact that a person transgresses once does not mean that he will transgress in the future.
Halacha 11
When the two days of a holiday [celebrated in the diaspora] fall on Thursday and Friday, an eruv tavshilin should be established on Wednesday, the day before the holiday. If a person forgot and did not establish [an eruv before the holiday], he should deposit the eruv on the first day, and make a stipulation.30
What is implied? He should deposit his eruv tavshilin on Thursday and say, "If today is a holiday, and tomorrow is a weekday, I will cook and bake for the Sabbath tomorrow, for there is no requirement. If today is a weekday, and tomorrow is a holiday, with this eruv I will be permitted to bake and to cook tomorrow, on the holiday, for the Sabbath."31
Halacha 12
To cite a similar example: when a person possesses two baskets of produce from which terumah was not separated, on the first day of the holiday he should say,32 "If today is a weekday, may this [basket] be considered terumah for [the other basket]. If today is a holiday, then may my words be of no consequence." He should then designate [the basket as terumah] and leave it.
On the second day [of the holiday], he should return and say, "If today is a holiday, then may my words be of no consequence. If today is a weekday, may this [basket] be considered terumah for [the other basket]." He should then designate [the same basket as terumah] and leave it as he did on the first day. [After] depositing the basket that he designated as terumah, he may partake of the other one.33
Halacha 13
When does the above apply? With regard to the two days observed as holidays in the diaspora. Concerning the two days observed as the holiday of Rosh HaShanah,34 by contrast, a person who forgot and did not establish an eruv on Wednesday does not have another opportunity to establish [an eruv]. He should either rely on the eruv established by others on his behalf, transfer ownership of his flour to someone who established an eruv, or be forbidden to bake and cook for the Sabbath.
Similarly, a person who did not separate terumah on Wednesday may not separate it until Saturday night.
Halacha 14
The above concepts applied only when the High Court of Eretz Yisrael would sanctify [the new moon] based on the observation [of witnesses],35 and the Jews in the diaspora would celebrate two days [as a holiday] to avoid the doubt, for they did not know the date on which the inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael sanctified [the new moon]. At present, however, the inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael follow a fixed calendar and sanctify [the months accordingly]. Therefore, the second day of a holiday is [observed], not to avoid a doubt, but [to perpetuate] a custom.36
Halacha 15
I therefore maintain that a person may not establish on a conditional basis either an eruv tavshilin, an eruv chatzerot, or a shituf in a lane. Nor may he tithe untithed produce on a conditional basis.37 Instead, he must perform [all such activities] on the day prior to the holiday.
Halacha 16
Just as it is a mitzvah to honor the Sabbath and to take delight in it, so too, do [these obligations apply to] all the holidays,38 as [implied by Isaiah 58:13], "...sanctified unto God and honored."39 [This applies to] all the holidays, for they are called, "holy convocations." We have explained the obligation implied by honor and delight in Hilchot Shabbat.40
Similarly, it is proper for a person not to partake of a [significant] meal on the day before a holiday from mid-afternoon onward, as on Friday.41 For this is also an expression of honor.
Everyone who treats the holidays with disrespect is considered as if he became associated with idol worship.42
Halacha 17
It is forbidden to fast or recite eulogies43 on the seven days of Pesach, the eight days of Sukkot, and the other holidays.44 On these days, a person is obligated to be happy and in good spirits; he, his children, his wife, the members of his household, and all those who depend on him, as [Deuteronomy 16:14] states: "And you shall rejoice in your festivals."
The "rejoicing" mentioned in the verse refers to sacrificing peace offerings, as will be explained in Hilchot Chaggigah.45 Nevertheless, included in [this charge to] rejoice is that he, his children, and the members of his household should rejoice, each one in a manner appropriate for him.
Halacha 18
What is implied?46 Children should be given roasted seeds, nuts, and sweets. For women, one should buy attractive clothes and jewelry according to one's financial capacity. Men should eat meat and drink wine, for there is no happiness without partaking of meat,47nor is there happiness without partaking of wine.48
When a person eats and drinks [in celebration of a holiday], he is obligated to feed converts, orphans, widows,49 and others who are destitute and poor.50 In contrast, a person who locks the gates of his courtyard and eats and drinks with his children and his wife, without feeding the poor and the embittered, is [not indulging in] rejoicing associated with a mitzvah, but rather the rejoicing of his gut.
And with regard to such a person [the verse, Hoshea 9:4] is applied: "Their sacrifices will be like the bread of mourners, all that partake thereof shall become impure, for they [kept] their bread for themselves alone." This happiness is a disgrace for them, as [implied by Malachi 2:3]: "I will spread dung on your faces, the dung of your festival celebrations."
Halacha 19
Although eating and drinking on the holidays are included in the positive commandment [to rejoice], one should not devote the entire day to food and drink. The following is the desired practice:
In the morning, the entire people should get up and attend the synagogues and the houses of study where they pray and read a portion of the Torah pertaining to the holiday.51 Afterwards, they should return home and eat. Then they should go to the house of study, where they read [from the Written Law] and review [the Oral Law] until noon.
After noon, they should recite the afternoon service and return home to eat and drink for the remainder of the day until nightfall.52
Halacha 20
When a person eats, drinks, and celebrates on a festival, he should not let himself become overly drawn to drinking wine, mirth, and levity, saying, "whoever indulges in these activities more is increasing [his observance of] the mitzvah of rejoicing." For drunkenness,53 profuse mirth, and levity are not rejoicing; they are frivolity and foolishness.
And we were not commanded to indulge in frivolity or foolishness, but rather in rejoicing that involves the service of the Creator of all existence. Thus, [Deuteronomy 28:47] states, "Because you did not serve God, Your Lord, with happiness and a glad heart with an abundance of prosperity." This teaches us that service [of God] involves joy. And it is impossible to serve God while in the midst of levity, frivolity, or drunkenness.54
Halacha 21
The [Jewish] court is obligated to appoint officers who will circulate [among the people] on the festivals and check the gardens, orchards, and river banks to see that men and women do not gather there to eat or to drink, lest they [conduct themselves immodestly and come to] sin.
Similarly, they must warn the people that men and women should not mix at festive gatherings in homes, nor should they overindulge in wine, lest they be led to sin.
Halacha 22
The days between the first and the seventh days of Pesach and [the days between] the first and the eighth days of Sukkot are called Chol HaMo'ed55 and are also called mo'ed. In the diaspora,56 there are four days during Pesach and five days during Sukkot.
Although we are obligated to celebrate on these days, and it is forbidden to deliver a eulogy or to fast,57 it is permitted to deliver a eulogy before the corpse of a Torah sage. After he is buried, however, it is forbidden to deliver a eulogy on these days.58
Needless to say that on Rosh Chodesh, on Chanukah, and on Purim we may deliver a eulogy before the corpse of a Torah sage, although it is forbidden to fast or deliver a eulogy on these days.59 After the burial, however, it is forbidden to deliver a eulogy on these days.
Halacha 23
The bier of a corpse should not be left in the street during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed, so that [no one] will be prompted to deliver a eulogy. Instead, it should be taken from the home to the grave.60
We do not observe the rites of mourning during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed.61 Nor does one rend his garments, partake of the meal of solace [served after the burial],62 or bare his shoulder because of a deceased during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed,63 with the exception of the relatives who are obligated to mourn because of him.64
If the deceased was a sage or an upright man,65 or one was present at his death,66 one should rend one's clothes because of his [death] during [Chol Ha]Mo'ed even though one is not related [to the deceased]. We may not rend our garments on the second day of a holiday at all;67 this applies even to the relatives of the deceased.
Halacha 24
During [Chol Ha]Mo'ed women lament, but they may not pound their hands on each other in grief or mourn. Once the corpse is buried, they may not lament. On Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah and Purim, they may lament and pound their hands on each other in grief before the corpse is buried, but they may not mourn.
What is meant by lamenting? That they all lament in unison. What is meant by mourning? That one recites [a dirge] and the others respond in unison.68
It is forbidden for a person to have a eulogy recited for a deceased person thirty days before the festival,69 so that the festival will not arrive when he is sad, and his heart is grieved and hurting, because of the memory of [his] agony. Instead, he should remove the grieving from his heart and direct his attention toward joy.
FOOTNOTES
1.The Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 527) explains that the Rambam understands that scriptural law permits preparing for the Sabbath on a holiday. As support, he cites Pesachim 46b, which makes an explicit statement to that effect.
Tosafot (Pesachim, loc. cit.) differs and offers an alternative interpretation of that passage, and states that scriptural law forbids preparing for the Sabbath on a holiday. Nevertheless, this prohibition applies only when there is no time to benefit from this food on the holiday itself.
The Magen Avraham 527:1 states that the Rambam also accepts the latter position. [One might reach such a conclusion from the Rambam's statements in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 1:1).] Most of the later authorities, however, agree with the Beit Yosef's interpretation of the Rambam's view. (See Be'ur Halachah 527.)
2.The Rambam's ruling follows the opinion of Rav Ashi (Beitzah 15b). That passage also mentions the view of Ravva, who maintains that the requirement for an eruv was instituted as a measure of respect for the Sabbath, to ensure that one remembers to leave a fine portion of food for the Sabbath. (See Shulchan Aruch HaRav 527:2.)
3.I.e., an eruv chatzerot, as described in the first five chapters of Hilchot Eruvin.
4.The Ra'avad rejects the rationale offered by the Rambam and gives another explanation: Eruv means "mixture," and this portion of food enables the combining together of the activities necessary to prepare for the Sabbath and for the holiday.
The Maggid Mishneh clarifies the Rambam's view, stating that the name eruv is appropriate only for an eruv chatzerot. Nevertheless, since both an eruv t'chumim and an eruv tavshilin involve a distinction that is created through depositing a portion of food, the Rabbis applied this term to those halachic institutions.
5.The Maggid Mishneh notes that according to the Rambam, it appears that it is not necessary to include bread in one's eruv at all. This view is shared by the Ramban and the Rashba. The Maggid Mishneh adds, however, that it is nevertheless customary to include bread in the eruv. Rabbenu Tam (Sefer HaYashar, section 392) and the Halachot Gedolot, by contrast, require that bread be included. (Their rationale is that since one desires both to cook and to bake on the festival for the Sabbath, the eruv should included both cooked food and bread which was baked.)
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 527:2) states that at the outset, it is proper to include both bread and a portion of cooked food in the eruv. After the fact, however, the eruv is acceptable even if bread is not included. This ruling is accepted by the later authorities.
6.The Maggid Mishneh states that fruit is also excluded. This applies to fruit that is eaten raw. With regard to cooked fruit, the ruling depends on the local practice of whether or not it is customary to eat this together with meat. (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 527:11; Mishnah Berurah 527:18).
7.It is, however, customary to do so to fulfill the mitzvah behiddur, "in a manner that is becoming" (Mishnah Berurah 527:8).
8.I.e., leftovers that one discovered when scraping the pot clean.
9.Shulchan Aruch HaRav 527:13 and the Mishnah Berurah 527:20 state that it is somewhat disrespectful to the mitzvah to use such foods, and this should be done only when one has no other food available.
10.I.e., although at times the term "cooked" has a distinct meaning - "prepared in water over a fire" - and is used to the exclusion of these other forms of preparing food.
11.See Hilchot Shabbat 9:3 and the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Machshirin 6:3).
12.After one has completed all one's Sabbath preparations, one may eat the eruv before the commencement of the Sabbath (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 527:16). Nevertheless, it is customary to use the loaf of bread utilized for the eruv as lechem mishneh, the second loaf, for the Friday night meal and the Sabbath morning meal, and to partake of it during Se'udah Shelishit, the third Sabbath meal. The rationale: Since it was used for one mitzvah, it is proper to use it for others (Maharil, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 527:25; Mishnah Berurah 527:48).
13.The Ra'avad notes that one can set aside the food one prepared for the holiday before the eruv was lost, and use that for the Sabbath, and prepare new food for the holiday. This is permitted even when one has completed all of one's preparations for the holiday. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:18) quotes this principle.
14.Our translation follows the understanding of the Rambam's statements as reflected in the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:17). The Rishon LeTzion offers a different interpretation: that once one has started cooking or baking, one may continue preparation of the entire meal even if the eruv is lost. This view is not, however, accepted by the later authorities. (See also the Hagahot Maimoniot.) The authorities do, nevertheless, allow one to continue preparing an entire dish of food even when one had just begun the first stages of preparation before the eruv was lost.
15.See Hilchot Eruvin 1:20, 6:19-21.
16.E.g., a person's wife, his adult sons and daughters, and his Jewish servants and maid-servants (ibid.).
17.E.g., a person's children below the age of majority and his non-Jewish servants (ibid.).
18.The rationale is that having a portion in an eruv tavshilin is to a person's advantage, and a person may grant a colleague an advantage without his direct knowledge.
19.Indeed, this is the custom reflected in the statement establishing an eruv tavshilin, which is included in all normal printed siddurim. That statement establishes an eruv for everyone in the entire city. It must, however, be emphasized that reciting the statement itself is not sufficient. As mentioned in the previous halachah, it is necessary to have another person acquire a share in the eruv on behalf of the others.
20.The following rules apply when a person lives outside a city's holiday limits, but lives close enough to reach the city on a holiday if he establishes an eruv t'chumim: If the person making the eruv tavshilin made an explicit statement including the person living outside the city limits, he may rely on the eruv. Otherwise, he may not [Maggid Mishneh; Ramah (Orach Chayim 527:8)].
21.In this context, it is necessary to quote the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:7):
It is a mitzvah for every person to establish an eruv, and it is a mitzvah for the Torah leader of the community to establish an eruv on behalf of all the inhabitants of his community, so that a person who forgot to establish an eruv or was prevented from doing so, or who established an eruv that was later lost may rely upon it.
When, however, a person could establish an eruv, but fails to do so, because he desires to rely on the eruv established by the community's Torah leader, he is considered negligent, and may not rely on that eruv.
22.Although this commandment is Rabbinic in origin, it is proper to praise God, for He commanded us to follow the instructions of our Sages. (See Hilchot Eruvin 1:16; Hilchot Berachot 11:3.)
23.This applies in Eretz Yisrael, where the holidays are celebrated for one day only. In the diaspora, one omits the word "tomorrow" unless the holiday is celebrated on Friday and on the Sabbath. In that instance, one must establish an eruv on Thursday to be able to cook for the Sabbath on Friday, and the word "tomorrow" is in place.
24.It is customary to add "...to put away a dish to preserve its heat, to kindle a flame, and to prepare and perform on the holiday everything necessary for the Sabbath."
25.A formal transfer of ownership is required. The person acquiring the provisions must draw them into his own property or lift them up with the intent of acquiring them. It is not sufficient to acquire them by virtue of the transfer of a handkerchief (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 527:28; Mishnah Berurah 527:60).
26.The Tur [(Orach Chayim 527), based on Beitzah 21b] states that if there is no one who established an eruv to whom he could transfer ownership of his provisions, he is permitted to bake one loaf of bread, cook one type of food, and light one candle.
The Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 527) explains that the Rambam does not accept this ruling. Nevertheless, the Beit Yosef continues, some authorities are even more lenient and extend this option even when there are people who have established eruvin upon whom one might rely.
In his Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 527:20), Rav Yosef Karo quotes both views, but appears to favor that of the Rambam. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 527:29 and the Mishnah Berurah 527:61 cite the leniency mentioned by the Beit Yosef.
27.I.e., he cooked two types of food - one to be eaten on the holiday and one to be eaten on the Sabbath - or invited guests he knew would not come. It is permitted to cook a large quantity of food for the holiday and eat the remainder on the Sabbath (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 529:21). Moreover, there are opinions that one may cook several types of food, thus providing one with different food for the Sabbath as well, provided that one partakes of it on the holiday. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 527:27 and the Mishnah Berurah 527:68 state that the commonly accepted practice is to follow the latter leniency.
28.Although the rationale given for this leniency applies primarily with regard to the willful transgression of the law, the Ramah (Orach Chayim 527:23) states that even when a person violated the prohibition unknowingly, and cooked food for the Sabbath on a holiday, he is permitted to partake of it.
29.For others will emulate this undesirable example.
30.As explained in Halachah 14, this and the following halachah apply, because the celebration of the second day of the holiday was instituted as a result of the doubt regarding the day on which it should be celebrated. Therefore, one of the two days was in fact an ordinary weekday.
31.See Hilchot Eruvin 8:14, which states that similar principles also apply with regard to an eruv chatzerot. An eruv t'chumim, by contrast, cannot be established in a conditional manner.
32.For it is forbidden to separate terumah on a holiday, as stated above, Chapter 4, Halachah 26.
33.For the separation of the terumah on either the first or the second day is thus valid.
34.As explained in Chapter 1, Halachah 24, in contrast to the other holidays, the two days of Rosh HaShanah are considered a single continuum of holiness. They are given this status because Rosh HaShanah was always observed for two days, even in Eretz Yisrael itself.
35.See Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh, Chapter 1.
36.See Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 5:5.
37.The Rambam's logic is that in the era when the sanctification of the moon was dependent on the testimony of witnesses, the observance of the second day of a holiday was necessary because of the doubt regarding the Scriptural commandment (safek d'oraita). At present, there is no doubt; the second day is observed, because of a Rabbinical decree. Thus, one cannot say, "If today is a weekday," for neither of the days is a weekday: the first is a holiday according to Scriptural law, and the second is a holiday according to Rabbinic law.
The Ra'avad voices his appreciation of the Rambam's logic, but states that in practice, the custom has been to continue making conditional statements as was done in previous generations. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 527:22) cites the Ra'avad's view. In his Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 528) Rav Yosef Karo explains the more lenient view, stating that when instituting the observance of the second day of the holidays in the present era, our Sages did not require its observance to be more stringent than it was originally. Since such conditional statements were originally acceptable, they are also acceptable in the present era.
38.The B'nei Binyamin notes that several later authorities differ with regard to whether a holiday could be termed a Sabbath or not. (See P'nei Yehoshua, et al., at the conclusion of the fourth chapter of Beitzah.) Nevertheless, the Rambam's emphasis is not that the holidays are "Sabbaths," but that they are sanctified.
39.Although the proof-text states, "And you shall call the Sabbath 'A delight, sanctified unto God'...," it also applies to holidays, for they are also called "sanctified" by the Torah.
40.Chapter 30. Honor involves preparing one's home and one's garments for the Sabbath. Delight involves partaking of fine foods, and carrying out other activities that lead to physical satisfaction.
41.See Hilchot Shabbat 30:4, which explains that this restriction was instituted so that one will enter the Sabbath (in this instance, the holiday) with an appetite.
Mid-afternoon refers to nine seasonal hours after daybreak - i.e., 3 PM, on a day that begins at 6 AM and ends at 6 PM. This time will change throughout the year, becoming later in the summer and earlier in the winter.
42.Pesachim 118a notes that Exodus 34:17 states, "Do not make molten images for yourselves," and continues "observe the festival of matzot," establishing a connection between the two mitzvot.
Significantly, the Rashbam interprets this as referring to someone who works on the intermediate days of a festival. (See also Hilchot Teshuvah 3:14, which states that such a person is not granted a portion in the World-to-Come.)
43.For these activities run contrary to the spirit of rejoicing that must be encouraged on the festivals. The laws of mourning on the festivals are discussed in Hilchot Eivel, Chapter 10.
44.With this wording, the Rambam emphasizes that this prohibition also applies on the days of Chol HaMo'ed of Pesach and Sukkot. The other holidays the Rambam refers to are Rosh HaShanah and Shavuot.
The designation of Rosh HaShanah as a day of rejoicing - despite the fact that it is "the day of judgment" when we join in the collective acceptance of God as King - is reflected in Nechemiah 8:10, which records the charge Ezra and Nechemiah gave to the people: "Eat sumptuously, drink sweet beverages, and send portions to those who have none... for the joy of God is your strength" (based on a responsum of the Rambam's grandson, Rav Yehoshua HaNagid).
45.Hilchot Chaggigah 1:1 explains that in addition to the peace offerings referred to as korban chaggigah, other peace offerings should be sacrificed, so that one will partake of sacrificial meat during the holiday. These are referred to as shalmei simchah (peace offerings of joy) and the Rambam associates partaking of them with the mitzvah to "rejoice on your festivals."
46.I.e., what are the activities that will arouse happiness? Cognizant that an emotion cannot be commanded at will, our Sages required that on the holidays a person work on creating a setting that will naturally spur happiness to ensue.
47.The commentaries have raised questions on the Rambam's statements, based on Pesachim 109a, which states that during the time of the Temple, "there is no happiness without partaking of meat," this referring to sacrificial meat, as Deuteronomy 27:7 states, "And you shall sacrifice peace offerings... and you shall rejoice." After the destruction of the Temple, "there is no happiness without partaking of wine." No mention is made of the importance of eating non-sacrificial meat on the holidays.
Shulchan Aruch HaRav 529:7 explains that at present there is a greater obligation to drink wine than to eat meat. Nevertheless, since most people derive pleasure from eating meat, it is proper to partake of meat on the holidays.
48.The intent is not that one's festive pleasure should be eating and drinking, as indicated by the following halachot. Instead, the intent is that a person should create an atmosphere of rest, relaxation, and happiness so that he can direct his attention to spiritual matters.
49.When relating the command to rejoice on the festivals, Deuteronomy 16:14 states, "You shall rejoice on your festival together with your son and your daughter, your male and your female servants, the Levite, the convert, the orphan, and the widow." The Torah thus links the happiness one shares with the members of one's household with one's generosity in inviting the unfortunate to join in this rejoicing.
See also Hilchot Megillah 2:17, which states:
There is no greater and more splendid happiness than to gladden the hearts of the poor, the orphans, the widows, and the converts.
One who brings happiness to the hearts of these unfortunates resembles the Divine Presence, which [Isaiah 57:15] describes [as having the tendency] "to revive the spirit of the lowly and... those with broken hearts."
50.The Mishnah Berurah 529:17 mentions that in addition to inviting guests to one's festive table, a collection should also be made before the holiday to provide for the holiday needs of poor people who are too embarrassed to ask for hospitality.
51.See Hilchot Tefillah, Chapter 13, where the Torah portions associated with each holiday are mentioned.
52.The Rambam's statements follow the general guidelines given by Beitzah 15b, which states: Deuteronomy 16:18 refers to the festivals as "a gathering for God, your Lord," while Numbers 29:35 uses the expression, "A gathering for yourselves." What should be done? Divide them, half to God, and half to yourselves.
53.With regard to drunkenness, note the Rambam's statements in Hilchot De'ot 5:2, and in the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, chapter 8.
54.There are two dimensions reflected by the Rambam's statements:
a) the absolute negation of the hollow elation of frivolity;
b) the appreciation of the positive value of genuine happiness as an element of the service of God.
The latter concept receives greater focus in the conclusion of Hilchot Lulav, where the Rambam states:
The happiness with which a person should rejoice in the fulfillment of the mitzvot and the love of God who commanded them is a great service.... There is no greatness or honor other than celebrating before God.
55.Chol means "ordinary" or "weekday" in Hebrew and HaMo'ed means "the festival." Thus, the term means "the ordinary days of the festival." For the Torah tells us that the festivals of Pesach and Sukkot should be celebrated for seven and eight days respectively, but states that only the first and last days should be regarded as holidays. The observance of these "ordinary days of the festival" is the focus of the remainder of the text.
56.Where the first day of each holiday is celebrated for an extra day.
57.See Hilchot Ta'aniot 1:7.
58.See Hilchot Eivel 11:5. The Ra'avad adds that a eulogy may be recited on the day when a community hears about a sage's death. The Rambam mentions this concept in Hilchot Eivel.
59.See Hilchot Megillah 2:13; Hilchot Chanukah 3:3.
60.The mitzvah of l'vayah, accompanying the deceased, is carried out on Chol HaMo'ed. What is not done is to remain in a single place for a prolonged time.
61.Mo'ed Katan 14b states that since the mitzvah of celebrating on the festivals is incumbent on the entire Jewish community as a whole, it takes precedence over the obligation of individuals to mourn.
62.Even the relatives who partake of this meal should sit on ordinary chairs (Mo'ed Katan 3:7).
63.The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 340:16) states that one may bare one's shoulders in honor of any deceased person, and one must do so in honor of one's parents. At present, however, this custom is not followed at all even during an ordinary week (Ramah, loc. cit.:17).
64.I.e., the deceased's parents, spouse, brothers and sisters (this includes half-brothers and half-sisters), and children.
65.The Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 340:6) differs and states that at present it is not customary to rend one's garments because of a person's death unless one was present at the actual moment of death. This applies throughout the year as well as during Chol Hamoed.
66.This applies even if the deceased's conduct was unworthy (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 340:5). The Ramah adds that if the person was wont to commit any particular sin, there is no need to rend one's garments because of him.
67.Although we are permitted to perform all the forbidden labors necessary to bury a corpse (Chapter 1, Halachot 22-24), rending one's garments is forbidden.
68.See Hilchot Eivel 11:5.
69.In Hilchot Eivel 11:6, the Rambam interprets this as referring to a eulogy recited for a person who died more than thirty days before the festival. If a person dies within thirty days of the festival, a eulogy may be recited. This distinction is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 547:3).
This refers even to a eulogy recited without a fee, following the view of Shmuel (Mo'ed Katan 8a).
-------
Hayom Yom:
• "Today's Day" Sunday, Adar I 30, 5774 • 02 March 2014
Sunday 30 Adar I, Rosh Chodesh 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: P'kudei, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 145-150.
Tanya: Ch. 34. It is (p. 153)...explained later (p. 153).
My father said: A chassid creates an environment. If he does not, he had better check his own baggage carefully, to see whether his own affairs are in order. The very fact that he fails to create an environment should make him as broken as a splinter. He must demand of himself: What am I doing in this world?
-------
Daily Thought:
Explosive Joy
Joy is an overflowing, an explosion.
Something enters a person’s life for which he could never be prepared, and his previously tidy self erupts in song, dance and joy.
Approach the divine with a calculated mind, and there is no window for joy. Embrace the infinite beyond mind, and let joy surprise you.
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment