TODAY'S LAWS & CUSTOMS:
• "THE THREE WEEKS"
During the Three Weeks, from 17th of Tamuz to the 9th of Av, we commemorate the conquest of Jerusalem, the destruction of the Holy Temple and the dispersion of the Jewish people.
Weddings and other joyful events are not held during this period; like mourners, we do not cut our hair, and various pleasurable activities are limited or proscribed. (The particular mourning customs vary from community to community, so consult a competent halachic authority for details.)
Citing the verse (Isaiah 1:27) "Zion shall be redeemed with mishpat [Torah] and its returnees with tzedakah," the Rebbe urged that we increase in Torah study (particularly the study of the laws of the Holy Temple) and charity during this period.
Links:
The Three Weeks
TODAY IN JEWISH HISTORY:
• GOLDEN CALF DESTROYED (1313 BCE)
Moses destroyed the Golden Calf, and re-ascended Mount Sinai to plead G-d's forgiveness for the Jewish people. (Exodus 32:20; Talmud Taanit 30b. See "Today in Jewish History" for Tammuz 16 and Tammuz 17)
DAILY QUOTE:
"And Jacob was greatly afraid, and he was distressed" (Genesis 32:8) - He was afraid that he might be killed, and distressed that he might kill.(Midrash Rabbah)
DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Matot, 4th Portion Numbers 31:25-31:41 with Rashi
• Chapter 31
25. The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, כה. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
26. "Take a count of the plunder of the captive people and animals, you, together with Eleazar the kohen and the paternal leaders of the community. כו. שָׂא אֵת רֹאשׁ מַלְקוֹחַ הַשְּׁבִי בָּאָדָם וּבַבְּהֵמָה אַתָּה וְאֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן וְרָאשֵׁי אֲבוֹת הָעֵדָה:
Take a count of: Heb. שָׂא אֶת ראשׁ, take the tally.
שא את ראש: קח את החשבון:
27. And you shall divide the plunder equally between the warriors who went out to battle and the entire congregation. כז. וְחָצִיתָ אֶת הַמַּלְקוֹחַ בֵּין תֹּפְשֵׂי הַמִּלְחָמָה הַיֹּצְאִים לַצָּבָא וּבֵין כָּל הָעֵדָה:
Divide the plunder equally between the warriors…: Half for these and half for those.
וחצית את המלקוח בין תפשי המלחמה וגו': חציו לאלו וחציו לאלו:
28. And you shall levy a tax for the Lord from the soldiers who went out to battle: one soul out of every five hundred, from the people, from the cattle, from the donkeys, and from the sheep. כח. וַהֲרֵמֹתָ מֶכֶס לַיהֹוָה מֵאֵת אַנְשֵׁי הַמִּלְחָמָה הַיֹּצְאִים לַצָּבָא אֶחָד נֶפֶשׁ מֵחֲמֵשׁ הַמֵּאוֹת מִן הָאָדָם וּמִן הַבָּקָר וּמִן הַחֲמֹרִים וּמִן הַצֹּאן:
29. You shall take from their half and give it to Eleazar the kohen as a gift to the Lord. כט. מִמַּחֲצִיתָם תִּקָּחוּ וְנָתַתָּה לְאֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן תְּרוּמַת יְהֹוָה:
30. From the half belonging to the children of Israel you shall take one part out of fifty of the people, of the cattle, of the donkeys, of the sheep, and of all animals, and you shall give them to the Levites, the guardians of the Mishkan of the Lord." ל. וּמִמַּחֲצִת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל תִּקַּח | אֶחָד | אָחֻז מִן הַחֲמִשִּׁים מִן הָאָדָם מִן הַבָּקָר מִן הַחֲמֹרִים וּמִן הַצֹּאן מִכָּל הַבְּהֵמָה וְנָתַתָּה אֹתָם לַלְוִיִּם שֹׁמְרֵי מִשְׁמֶרֶת מִשְׁכַּן יְהֹוָה:
31. Moses and Eleazar the kohen did as the Lord had commanded Moses. לא. וַיַּעַשׂ משֶׁה וְאֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
32. The plunder, which was in addition to the spoils that the army had spoiled, consisted of six hundred and seventy five thousand sheep. לב. וַיְהִי הַמַּלְקוֹחַ יֶתֶר הַבָּז אֲשֶׁר בָּזְזוּ עַם הַצָּבָא צֹאן שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף וְשִׁבְעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשֶׁת אֲלָפִים:
The plunder which was in addition to the spoil…: Because they were not commanded to levy a tax from the movable objects, but only from the [living] plunder, Scripture expresses it in this way: The plunder which was included in the allocation and in the tax-which remained over after the spoils of the movable property were plundered by the soldiers for themselves, and were therefore not included in the allocation- [was as follows:] the number of sheep etc.
ויהי המלקוח יתר הבז: לפי שלא נצטוו להרים מכס מן המטלטלין אלא מן המלקוח, כתב את הלשון הזה ויהי המלקוח שבא לכלל חלוקה ולכלל מכס, שהיה עודף על בז המטלטלין אשר בזזו עם הצבא איש לו, ולא בא לכלל חלוקה מספר הצאן וגו':
33. Seventy two thousand cattle. לג. וּבָקָר שְׁנַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים אָלֶף:
34. Sixty one thousand donkeys. לד. וַחֲמֹרִים אֶחָד וְשִׁשִּׁים אָלֶף:
35. As for the people, of the women who had no experience of intimate relations with a man, all souls were thirty two thousand. לה. וְנֶפֶשׁ אָדָם מִן הַנָּשִׁים אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָדְעוּ מִשְׁכַּב זָכָר כָּל נֶפֶשׁ שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלשִׁים אָלֶף:
36. The half that was the portion of those who went out to battle: the number of sheep was three hundred and thirty seven thousand, five hundred. לו. וַתְּהִי הַמֶּחֱצָה חֵלֶק הַיֹּצְאִים בַּצָּבָא מִסְפַּר הַצֹּאן שְׁלשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף וּשְׁלשִׁים אֶלֶף וְשִׁבְעַת אֲלָפִים וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
37. The tax to the Lord from the sheep was six hundred and seventy five. לז. וַיְהִי הַמֶּכֶס לַיהֹוָה מִן הַצֹּאן שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת חָמֵשׁ וְשִׁבְעִים:
38. Thirty six thousand cattle, of which the tax to the Lord was seventy two. לח. וְהַבָּקָר שִׁשָּׁה וּשְׁלשִׁים אָלֶף וּמִכְסָם לַיהֹוָה שְׁנַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים:
39. Thirty thousand and five hundred donkeys, of which the tax to the Lord was sixty one. לט. וַחֲמֹרִים שְׁלשִׁים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת וּמִכְסָם לַיהֹוָה אֶחָד וְשִׁשִּׁים:
40. Sixteen thousand people, of which the tax to the Lord was thirty two people. מ. וְנֶפֶשׁ אָדָם שִׁשָּׁה עָשָׂר אָלֶף וּמִכְסָם לַיהֹוָה שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלשִׁים נָפֶשׁ:
41. Moses gave the tax which was a gift to the Lord, to Eleazar the kohen, as the Lord had commanded Moses. מא. וַיִּתֵּן משֶׁה אֶת מֶכֶס תְּרוּמַת יְהֹוָה לְאֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת מֹשֶׁה:
-------
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 88 - 89
• Chapter 88
The psalmist weeps and laments bitterly over the maladies and suffering Israel endures in exile, which he describes in detail.
1. A song, a psalm by the sons of Korach, for the Conductor, upon the machalat le'anot; 1 a maskil2 for Heiman the Ezrachite.
2. O Lord, God of my deliverance, by day I cried out [to You], by night I [offer my prayer] before You.
3. Let my prayer come before You; turn Your ear to my supplication.
4. For my soul is sated with affliction, and my life has reached the grave.
5. I was reckoned with those who go down to the pit, I was like a man without strength.
6. [I am regarded] among the dead who are free, like corpses lying in the grave, of whom You are not yet mindful, who are yet cut off by Your hand.
7. You have put me into the lowest pit, into the darkest places, into the depths.
8. Your wrath has weighed heavily upon me, and all the waves [of Your fury] have constantly afflicted me.
9. You have estranged my friends from me, You have made me abhorrent to them; I am imprisoned and unable to leave.
10. My eye is afflicted because of distress; I call to You, O Lord, every day; I have stretched out my hands [in prayer] to You.
11. Do You perform wonders for the deceased? Do the dead stand to offer You praise? Selah.
12. Is Your kindness recounted in the grave, your faithfulness in the place of perdition?
13. Are Your wondrous deeds known in the darkness [of the grave], or Your righteousness in the land of oblivion?
14. But, I, to You, O Lord, I cry; each morning my prayer comes before You.
15. Why, O Lord, do You forsake my soul? Why do You conceal Your countenance from Me?
16. From my youth I have been afflicted and approaching death, yet I have borne the fear of You which is firmly established within me.
17. Your furies have passed over me; Your terrors have cut me down.
18. They have engulfed me like water all day long, they all together surrounded me.
19. You have estranged from me beloved and friend; I have been rejected by my intimates.
Chapter 89
This psalm speaks of the kingship of the House of David, the psalmist lamenting its fall from power for many years, and God's abandonment and spurning of us.
1. A maskil1 by Eitan the Ezrachite.
2. I will sing of the Lord's kindness forever; to all generations I will make known Your faithfulness with my mouth.
3. For I have said, "The world is built with kindness; there in the heavens You establish Your faithfulness.”
4. I have made a covenant with My chosen one; I have sworn to David, My servant:
5. "I will establish Your descendants forever; I will build your throne for all generations," Selah.
6. Then the heavens will extol Your wonders, O Lord; Your faithfulness, too, in the congregation of the holy ones.
7. Indeed, who in heaven can be compared to the Lord, who among the supernal beings can be likened to the Lord!
8. The Almighty is revered in the great assembly of the holy ones, awe-inspiring to all who surround Him.
9. O Lord, God of Hosts, who is mighty like You, O God! Your faithfulness surrounds You.
10. You rule the vastness of the sea; when its waves surge, You still them.
11. You crushed Rahav (Egypt) like a corpse; with Your powerful arm You scattered Your enemies.
12. Yours are the heavens, the earth is also Yours; the world and all therein-You established them.
13. The north and the south-You created them; Tabor and Hermon sing of [the greatness] of Your Name.
14. Yours is the arm which has the might; strengthen Your hand, raise high Your right hand.
15. Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; kindness and truth go before Your countenance.
16. Fortunate is the people who know the sound of the shofar; Lord, they walk in the light of Your countenance.
17. They rejoice in Your Name all day, and they are exalted through Your righteousness.
18. Indeed, You are the splendor of their might, and in Your goodwill our glory is exalted.
19. For our protectors turn to the Lord, and our king to the Holy One of Israel.
20. Then You spoke in a vision to Your pious ones and said: "I have granted aid to [David] the mighty one; I have exalted the one chosen from among the people.
21. I have found David, My servant; I have anointed him with My holy oil.
22. It is he whom My hand shall be prepared [to assist]; My arm, too, shall strengthen him.
23. The enemy shall not prevail over him, nor shall the iniquitous person afflict him.
24. And I will crush his adversaries before him, and will strike down those who hate him.
25. Indeed, My faithfulness and My kindness shall be with him, and through My Name his glory shall be exalted.
26. I will set his hand upon the sea, his right hand upon the rivers.
27. He will call out to Me, 'You are my Father, my God, the strength of my deliverance.’
28. I will also make him [My] firstborn, supreme over the kings of the earth.
29. I will maintain My kindness for him forever; My covenant shall remain true to him.
30. And I will bestow [kingship] upon his seed forever, and his throne will endure as long as the heavens last.
31. If his children forsake My Torah and do not walk in My ordinances;
32. if they profane My statutes and do not observe My commandments,
33. then I will punish their transgression with the rod and their misdeeds with plagues.
34. Yet I shall not take away My kindness from him, nor betray My faithfulness.
35. I will not abrogate My covenant, nor change that which has issued from My lips.
36. One thing I have sworn by My holiness-I will not cause disappointment to David.
37. His seed will endure forever and his throne will be [resplendent] as the sun before Me.
38. Like the moon, it shall be established forever; [the moon] is a faithful witness in the sky for all time.”
39. Yet You have forsaken and abhorred; You became enraged at Your anointed.
40. You annulled the covenant with Your servant; You have profaned his crown [by casting it] to the ground.
41. You shattered all his fences; You turned all his strongholds into ruin.
42. All wayfarers despoiled him; he has become a disgrace to his neighbors.
43. You have uplifted the right hand of his adversaries; You have made all his enemies rejoice.
44. You also turned back the blade of his sword, and did not sustain him in battle.
45. You put an end to his splendor, and toppled his throne to the ground.
46. You have cut short the days of his youth; You have enclothed him with long-lasting shame.
47. How long, O Lord, will You conceal Yourself-forever? [How long] will Your fury blaze like fire?
48. O remember how short is my life span! Why have You created all children of man for naught?
49. What man can live and not see death, can save his soul forever from the grave?
50. Where are Your former deeds of kindness, my Lord, which You swore to David in Your faithfulness?
51. Remember, my Lord, the disgrace of Your servants, that I bear in my bosom from all the many nations;
52. that Your enemies have disgraced, O Lord, that they have disgraced the footsteps of Your anointed.
53. Blessed is the Lord forever, Amen and Amen.
-------
Tanya: Igeret HaTeshuva , beginning of Chapter 4
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
Wednesday, Tammuz 18, 5774 • July 16, 2014
Igeret HaTeshuva , beginning of Chapter 4
Certain penitential fasts, then, are to be actually undertaken, while others are to be redeemed through charity.
ואולם כל הנ״ל הוא לגמר הכפרה ומירוק הנפש לה׳ אחר התשובה
However, all we have said refers to the culmination of the atonement — to polishing the soul clean before G d, so that no vestige of former sin remains, after repentance,
כמו שכתוב לעיל מהגמרא, פרק קמא דזבחים, דעולה דורון היא לאחר שריצה הפרקליט וכו׳
as cited above1 from the Talmud, ch. 1 of Zevachim, where the olah sacrifice brought for transgressing a positive command is described as the gift offered to the offended party after an intercessor’s successful plea.
The above-mentioned fasts (or their counterpart in charity) serve a similar function.
אמנם התחלת מצות התשובה ועיקרה
But the beginning of the mitzvah of teshuvah and its core
לשוב עד ה׳ באמת ובלב שלם
is a true and wholehearted return to G d.
As will soon become apparent, this “return (lit.:) until G d” means returning until the point that one has restored completeness to Havayah, the Four-Letter Name of G d, that is to be found within every Jewish soul.
The letters that comprise the Tetragrammaton are (in descending order) yud and hei, and vav and hei.
ההכרח לבאר היטב בהרחבת הביאור
This must now be explained thoroughly and comprehensively.
בהקדים מה שכתוב בזהר הקדוש בביאור מלת תשובה על דרך הסוד
Let us begin with the Zohar’s interpretation2 of teshuvah according to Sod, the mystical approach to the Torah:
תשוב ה׳
“[Teshuvah is] tashuv hei (‘the hei is to be returned’);
The function of teshuvah is to return the letter hei of the Divine Name Havayah — to reattach it to the level represented by the letter that precedes it, just as it was attached to it before the individual sinned.
ה׳ תתאה תשובה תתאה
[the reconnection of] the latter hei [to the preceding letter vav] is teshuvah tata‘ah (’lower-level teshuvah‘);
ה׳ עילאה תשובה עילאה
[the reconnection of] the former hei [to the preceding letter yud] is teshuvah ila‘ah (’higher-level teshuvah‘).“
וגם מה שכתוב בזהר הקדוש בקצת מקומות שאין תשובה מועלת לפוגם בריתו ומוציא זרע לבטלה
We must also note that the Zohar states several times3 that teshuvah is ineffective for violation of the covenant and for the wasteful emission of semen.
והוא דבר תמוה מאד, שאין לך דבר עומד בפני התשובה, ואפילו עבודה זרה וגילוי עריות וכו׳
This is most astonishing, for4 “nothing can stand in the way of teshuvah, even idolatry, incest, and so on.”
Jews are commanded to give up their lives rather than transgress these prohibitions, yet repentance atones even for them. How, then, can it be that there are other sins for which repentance is ineffective?
ופירש בראשית חכמה שכוונת הזוהר שאין מועלת תשובה תתאה, כי אם תשובה עילאה וכו׳
The Reishit Chochmah explains5 that the intention of the Zohar is that though teshuvah tata‘ah (the conventional level of repentance) is not effective, teshuvah ila’ah is.
הנה להבין זאת מעט מזעיר
To grasp even a minute glimmer6 of this,
צריך להקדים מה שמבואר מהכתוב ומדברי רז״ל, ענין הכרת ומיתה בידי שמים
we must preface what Scripture and our Sages say about [what is entailed by] excision and death by divine agency.
כשעבר עבירה שחייבים עליה כרת, הי׳ מת ממש קודם חמשים שנה
A violator of a sin punishable by excision would actually7 die before his fiftieth year.8
ובמיתה בידי שמים, מת ממש קודם ששים שנה
In the case of death by divine agency he would actually9 die before sixty,
כחנניה בן עזור הנביא, בירמיהו
like the prophet Chananiah ben Azur in Jeremiah.10
As a result of his false prophecy, G d told him, “I shall banish you from the face of the earth….” This resulted in his actual death.
ולפעמים גם במיתה בידי שמים נפרעין לאלתר, כמו שמצינו בער ואונן
(11Indeed, there have been instances in which the punishment of death by divine agency was also meted out instantly, as with Er and Onan.)
This involved a sin incurring death by divine agency.12
In any event, both Scripture and the Sages attest that those guilty of sins punishable by excision or death by divine agency would actually die before they reached the age of fifty or sixty. This leads to the following question:
והרי נמצאו בכל דור כמה וכמה חייבי כריתות ומיתות, והאריכו ימיהם ושנותיהם בנעימים
But in every generation there are so many individuals liable to excision and death who nevertheless enjoy extended and pleasant13 days and years!
FOOTNOTES
1. Beg. of ch. 2. See also Likutei Sichot, Vol. XIX, p. 401, note 12, and the marginal comment on this note.
2. III, 122a.
3. Zohar I, 60a, 219b; Zohar II, 214b.
4. Note of the Rebbe: “Rambam, conclusion of ch. 3 of Hilchot Teshuvah, following Yerushalmi, Peah 1:1; Zohar Chadash, conclusion of Parshat Bereishit.”
5. Shaar HaKedushah, ch. 17.
6. Note of the Rebbe: “Perhaps this expression is used (as opposed to, say, מעט מן המעט) because the former term (מעט) suggests that the extent of understanding is minute, while the latter term (מזעיר) suggests that qualitatively too this understanding is a mere glimmer.”
7. Note of the Rebbe: “Possibly the Alter Rebbe’s intention here is to negate the opinion of the Ramban at the end of Parshat Acharei.” The Ramban says there that it is sometimes possible that violators liable to excision “are not punished by physical excision; sometimes they may live to a ripe old age.” In specifying here that they would “actually” die, the Alter Rebbe evidently seeks to negate this opinion.
8. Note of the Rebbe: “As in Yerushalmi, Bikkurim, beg. of ch. 2, as explained in Tosafot, s.v. כרת, Shabbat 25a.”
9. Note of the Rebbe: “As above” — i.e., as in fn. 7.
10. Ch. 28.
11. Parentheses are in the original text.
12. Note of the Rebbe: “See above, end of ch. 1.”
13. Asked why the Alter Rebbe added the word “pleasant”, the Rebbe replied that this was done “in order to rule out the (labored) interpretation that this punishment was undergone by virtue of their having suffered poverty or the like, which is also called ‘death’ in Scripture (Shmot 4:19) and in Rabbinic terminology (quoted in Rashi, ad loc.).”
-------
Rambam:
• Daily Mitzvah - Sefer Hamitzvos:
Wednesday, Tammuz 18, 5774 • July 16, 2014
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Positive Commandment 70
The "Doubtful" Guilt Offering
"If a person sins and commits one of the commandments of G d which may not be committed, but he does not know, he is guilty, and he shall bear his transgression. He shall bring an unblemished ram from the flock, with the value for a guilt offering, to the kohen. The kohen shall then make atonement for his unintentional sin which he committed and did not know."—Leviticus 5:17-18.
One who is uncertain whether he committed a sin whose transgression would require him to bring a Sin Offering – e.g., two pieces of fat were before him, one permitted and one forbidden; he consumed one of them and the other was then lost (so as impossible to identify whether it was of the forbidden or permitted variety) – he must then bring an Asham Taluy (a "Doubtful Guilt Offering").
(If afterwards it was conclusively ascertained that he ate of the forbidden fats, he must bring a standard Sin Offering [even if has already brought his Asham].)
The "Doubtful" Guilt Offering
Positive Commandment 70
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 70th mitzvah is that we are commanded to bring a sacrifice called an asham talui, ("suspended guilt-offering") when in doubt regarding a sin [as to whether or not it has been committed. The type of sin referred to is one] which when done intentionally is punishable by kares, and when done unintentionally, one must bring a fixed sin-offering.1
An example of a doubt which would necessitate an asham talui is as follows: a person had two pieces of fat lying before him — one from the kidneys [and therefore prohibited] and the other from the heart [which is permitted]. The person ate one of them and the other was either eaten by someone else or lost. The person is now in doubt as to whether he ate the permissible piece or the prohibited piece. In this case, because of his doubt, he must bring a sacrifice in order to obtain atonement. This sacrifice is known as an asham talui.
If later on it became clear that he ate fat from the kidneys, we now know that he definitely committed an unintentional transgression and must bring a fixed sin-offering.
The verse which speaks of this offering is G‑d's statement in the Torah portion Leviticus,2 "If a person sins by violating one of G‑d's prohibitions without knowing [for sure], he still bears responsibility. He must bring an unblemished ram with the prescribed value to the kohen as a guilt offering. The kohen shall then make atonement for the inadvertent sin that the person committed without knowing." [The phrase "without knowing"] refers to his not knowing whether he actually did or did not unintentionally perform the transgression. Our Sages3 refer to this as lo hodah.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Kerisus.4
FOOTNOTES
1.See P69.
2.5:17-18.
3.Kerisus, Ch. 1, Mishneh 2.
4.17a.
________________________________________
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter: Sechirut Sechirut - Chapter 5 Sechirut - Chapter 5
Halacha 1
The following rules apply when a person rents an animal and it becomes sick, goes mad, or is conscripted for the king's service, even when it will not be returned. If it was taken or became sick or mad as the renter was journeying to his destination, the owner may tell the renter: "Behold the animal you hired is before you," and the renter is required to pay the full fee. When does the above apply? When he rented it to carry a burden that can be thrown to the ground without worry. If, however, he rented the donkey with the intent of riding on it or carrying glass utensils or the like, the owner of the donkey is required to provide another donkey for him if he hired a donkey without making any further specifications. If he does not provide another donkey, he must return the fee, and then a calculation should be made with regard to how much he should be paid for the portion of the journey that he traveled.
Halacha 2
The following rules apply in the above situation if the animal died or was injured, regardless of whether it was rented to carry a burden or to ride. If the owner said: "I am renting you a donkey," without specifying the beast, he is required to provide another donkey for the renter. If he does not, the renter may sell the animal and purchase another animal with [the proceeds, or rent another animal until he arrives at the destination agreed upon if the proceeds are not sufficient to purchase another animal.
Different rules apply if the owner told the renter: "I am renting you this donkey." When he rented it to ride upon it or to carry glass utensils and it died in the middle of the way, he should purchase another animal with the proceeds from the sale of the carcass if that is possible. If the proceeds are not sufficient for that, he should rent an animal, even if this demands all the proceeds of the sale to transport him to the destination specified. If the proceeds are not sufficient - neither to purchase nor to rent an animal - the renter must pay the owner the fee for the portion of the journey. With regard to the remainder, all he has against him is complaints.
If he hired it to carry a burden that was not fragile, since the owner said "this donkey," and it died in the middle of the journey, he is not required to provide another donkey for him. Instead, the renter must pay him the fee for the portion of the journey and leave him the carcass.
Halacha 3
The following rules apply when a person hires a ship and it sinks in the midst of the journey. If the owner told the renter, "I am renting you this ship," and the renter hired it to carry wine without specifying which wine he would be carrying, even if the renter already paid the owner his fee, the owner must return it in its entirety. For the renter can tell him: "Bring the actual ship that I rented from you, for I was very specific in wanting this ship. When you do, I will bring wine and transport it on it."
If the owner does not specify a ship and the renter hires one to transport a specific shipment of wine, even though he did not pay the owner any portion of the fee, he is required to pay him the entire amount. For the owner can tell him: "Bring me the wine that you specified and I will transport it for you." He must, however, deduct compensation for the difficulty for half the journey, for a person who works to sail a ship cannot be compared to someone who is idle.
The following rules apply if the owner told the renter: "I am renting you this ship," and the renter mentioned a specific shipment of wine. If the renter already paid the owner his fee, he cannot require him to return it. If the renter did not pay it, he need not. The rationale is that the owner cannot bring that ship, nor can the renter bring that wine. If the rental agreement did not specify the ship or the wine, the fee should be divided between them.
Halacha 4
When a person rents a ship and unloads in the midst of the journey, he must pay the fee for the entire journey. If, however, the renter finds another person who will rent the ship in his place until the location he originally agreed, he may rent it out to him. The owner of the ship has, however, a complaint against him.
Similarly, if the renter sold all the merchandise on the ship to another person in the middle of the way and descended, and the purchaser ascended in his place, the owner of the ship takes half the rent from the first one and half from the second. The owner has a complaint against the renter, because he required him to accommodate the opinion of another person with whom he is not familiar. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 5
From this, I conclude that when a person rents a house from a colleague for a specific period and the renter desires to sublet the house to another person until the end of the lease, he may, provided there are the same number of people in the subletter's household as in his own. If, however, there are four in his own household, he should not sublet it to a household of five. The rationale is that our Sages' statement that a renter may not sublet the object that he rents applies only with regard to movable property.
The motivating principle for that restriction is that the owner may tell the renter: "I do not desire that my object be entrusted to the hands of another person." With regard to landed property or a ship, by contrast, its owner is with it at all times, and this objection is not relevant.
Similarly, I conclude that if the owner of the home tells the renter: "Why should you trouble yourself to rent my house to others? If you do not desire to continue dwelling within it, leave and leave it alone; I am freeing you from the rent," the renter may not sublet it to anyone else. For in such an instance, the charge: "Do not withhold good from its owner" applies. For instead of renting it out to someone else, the tenant should leave this person his own home.
There are those who rule that the renter may not sublet the dwelling at all and must pay the rent until the appointed time. To me, this does not appear a true ruling.
Halacha 6
When a person tells a colleague: "I am renting you this house," and after he rented it to him, it fell, he is not required to rebuild it for him. Instead, he should calculate the amount of rent due for the time during which he used it and return the remainder of the rent. If, however, the owner tears down the house, he is obligated to provide another home for the renter or rent a similar dwelling for him.
Similarly, if after renting the house to this person, he rented it or sold it to a gentile or to a person who does not abide by the law who supplanted the rental of the first person, the owner is obligated to rent a similar house for him. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 7
If a person rented a house to a colleague without specifying the house, and afterwards the house fell, the owner is required to build it for him or provide him with another housed Even if the new house he gives him is smaller than the house that fell, the renter cannot prevent him from giving him this one, provided it is called a house. If, however, he told him: "I am renting you a house like this," the owner is obligated to provide him with a house that it is the same length and width as the house that he originally showed him. He cannot tell him: "My intent was only that the house should be close to the river," "... to the marketplace," or "... to the bathhouse, as this one is." Instead, he is obligated to provide him with a house of that size and shape."
Therefore, if it was large, he should not make it small. If it was small, he should not make it large. If it was a one-room apartment, he should not make it two. If it was a two-room apartment he should not make it one. He should not reduce the number of windows that it possessed, nor should he add to them unless they both agree.
Halacha 8
When a person rents out a loft without any specifications, he is required to provide any such structure for the renter. If the owner tells him: "I am renting you the loft on top of this house," he made the house subservient to the loft. Therefore, if four handbreadths or more of the loft become ruined, the owner is obligated to fix it. If he does not fix it, the renter may descend and dwell in the house together with the owner until he fixes it.
The following rules apply when there are two lofts, one on top of the other: if the upper loft becomes ruined, he may dwell in the lower one. If the lower one becomes ruined, there is a doubt whether he has the right to dwell in the upper loft or the house. Therefore, he should not dwell in either of them. If, however, he dwells in one of them, he cannot be forced to leave.
An incident occurred when a person told a colleague: "I am renting you this vine that is draped over this peach tree," and then the peach tree became uprooted from its place. The question was brought to the Sages and they told the owner: "You are obligated to provide the peach tree for him for as long as the vine exists." Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
-------
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters: Shegagot Shegagot - Perek 6, Shegagot Shegagot - Perek 7, Shegagot Shegagot - Perek 8
Shegagot - Perek 6
Halacha 1
The laws concerning inadvertent consumption of foods are the same as those concerning inadvertent intimate relations. Therefore if one partook of the same type of forbidden food many times in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering even though there were many days in the interim.
What is implied? One partook of forbidden fat on a given day and did so also on the following day, and the day following that in one state of lapsed awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering, even if they were cooked in different pots. If, by contrast, one inadvertently partook of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat, he became aware of the transgression and then again inadvertently partook of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and became aware of the transgression, he is liable for each time he ate. For gaining awareness causes each inadvertent transgression to be considered as distinct.
If one partook of half an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and then partook of another half of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat in one state of lapsed awareness, they are joined together, even though they were cooked and served in different pots and he made an interruption between partaking of them. For the different pots do not cause the inadvertent transgressions to be considered as distinct. This applies provided he did not take more than the time to eat three eggs between the two times he ate, as explained in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot. Just as anything eaten in this time is combined to comprise a minimum measure to make a person who did so willfully liable for lashes, so too, anything eaten in this time is combined to comprise a minimum measure to make a person who did so inadvertently liable to bring a sacrifice.
Halacha 2
If a person partook of notar from five different sacrifices, an olive-sized portion from each sacrifice, in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering, even if he partook of them in five different pots. The rationale is that they are all included in one prohibition and the different pots do not cause the inadvertent transgressions to be considered as distinct. Nor do the different bodies of the sacrifices cause the inadvertent transgressions to be considered as distinct. There is no difference whether one partakes of meat that is notar from one sacrifice or from many sacrifices.
Similarly, when one slaughters five sacrificial animals outside the Temple Courtyard in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering. To what can the matter be compared? To one who bows down to five forbidden images in one lapse of awareness.
Halacha 3
If one let the blood of his animal and received it in two cups and drank them both in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering.
Halacha 4
When a person eats foods that are forbidden because of different prohibitions in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for one sin-offering for every type of prohibition.
What is implied? One partook of an olive-sized portion of each of the following: forbidden fat, blood, notar, and piggul, in one lapse of awareness must bring four sin-offerings. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Anyone who eats a single olive-sized portion of food that is forbidden because of many different prohibitions in one lapse of awareness must bring a sin-offering for every prohibition, provided the prohibitions either cause the entity to be forbidden to additional people, the scope of the latter prohibition encompasses other entities together with the entity that was originally prohibited, or the two prohibitions take effect at the same time.
For this reason, if a person who is ritually impure partook of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat that was notar on Yom Kippur, he must bring four sin-offerings and a guilt-offering: one sin-offering, because he was impure and he partook of consecrated food, one, because he partook of forbidden fat, one, because he partook of notar, and one, because he ate on Yom Kippur, provided another food is combined with this olive-sized portion so that it comprises a date-sized portion. And he must bring a guilt-offering for the misappropriation of consecrated property, for he inadvertently derived benefit from consecrated property.
Halacha 5
When a person eats and drinks on Yom Kippur in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Eating and drinking is considered as a single act.
Halacha 6
When a person performs a forbidden labor on Yom Kippur that falls on the Sabbath, he is liable for two sin-offerings, because they are two prohibitions that take effect at the same time.
Halacha 7
When a person eats a half of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and half an olive-sized portion of blood in one lapse of awareness, he is not liable for an offering. Just as the prohibitions are not combined to make one liable for lashes, as explained in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, so too, they are not combined to make him liable for a sacrifice.
Halacha 8
When a person inadvertently partook of half an olive-sized portion of a forbidden substance and then became aware of his transgression, but forgot and partook of another half an olive-sized portion of the same substance in a second lapse of awareness, he is not liable for an offering. The rationale is that he became aware in the interim and awareness causes a distinction to be made even with regard to half the required measure.
Similarly, if one wrote one letter on the Sabbath inadvertently and then became aware of the matter and then forgot and then wrote another letter next to the first in a second lapse of awareness, he is not liable for a sin-offering. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
In a like vein, if a person transferred an article two cubits in the public domain on the Sabbath inadvertently, transferred it another two cubits in conscious violation of the Sabbath laws and then transferred it two cubits inadvertently, he is liable if he transferred it by throwing it. The rationale is not that his gaining awareness after half the measure is not significant, but rather that, after throwing the article, he is unable to bring it back. Therefore the awareness he gained in the interim is of no avail. If he transferred the article by passing it, he is exempt, because gaining awareness after half the required measure has been completed is significant.
Halacha 9
The following rules apply when a person ate an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and then a second olive-sized portion of forbidden fat in one lapse of awareness. If he became aware of the first transgression and then became aware of the second, he must bring two sin-offerings, because the difference in his becoming aware of the transgressions creates a distinction even though he did not set a side a sacrificial animal yet. If, however, he became aware of both of them at the same time, he should bring only one sin-offering. Similarly, it appears to me that the law is the same with regard to forbidden sexual relations.
Halacha 10
If one ate an olive-sized portion and a half of forbidden fat in a single lapse of awareness, then became aware that he partook of the olive-sized portion and then, partook of another half of an olive-sized portion while he is unaware of partaking of the other half, he is only liable for one sin-offering. The rationale is that the second half of an olive-sized portion is not combined with the first half, even though it was eaten during its lapse of awareness, because he had become aware of part of the transgression performed in the initial lapse of awareness.
Halacha 11
A person partook of two olive-sized portions of forbidden fat and then became aware of eating one of them. He then partook of another olive-sized portion while he was unaware of the second transgression and then brought a sin-offering to atone for the first transgression. The first and the second transgressions are atoned for by this sacrifice, but not the third. Instead, when he becomes aware of it, he should bring another sin-offering.
If he brought a sin-offering for the third transgression, it secures atonement for the second and the third, because they both were committed during a single lapse of awareness, but atonement for the first is not secured by this sacrifice.
If he brought a sin-offering for the middle transgression, atonement is secured for all three. The rationale is that both the first and the third were performed during the same lapse of awareness that involved the second. Hence when he becomes aware of the first and the third transgressions, he does not have to bring an additional sin-offering.
Halacha 12
A person ate one of two pieces of fat, one, kosher and one, forbidden and he was unsure whether he had eaten the permitted fat or the forbidden fat and then he ate another piece in a similar mixture and again he was unsure whether he had eaten the permitted fat or the forbidden fat. If, afterwards, he gained definitive knowledge that he ate forbidden fat on both occasions, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Although the lack of certainty concerning whether or not he transgressed is sufficient to create a distinction with regard to a tentative guilt-offering, it is not considered as gaining awareness to require a distinction between the sin-offerings brought for atonement.
Shegagot - Perek 7
Halacha 1
When a person prostrates himself to a false deity, poured a libation to it, offers a burnt-offering to it, and slaughters an animal as a sacrifice to it in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for four sin-offerings. Similarly, if he defecated to Peor or threw a rock to Mercuryin one lapse of awareness, he is liable for two sin-offerings. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. The person will be liable for every act of service performed.
When does the above apply? When he consciously desired to serve a false deity, but was unaware that these acts constituted service. If, however, he willfully performed these acts, but inadvertently served a false deity, he is liable for only one sin-offering.
What is implied? He knew that a particular image was a false deity and that it is forbidden to serve it, but did not know that bowing down to it or pouring a libation constituted a transgression and bowed down and poured a libation, he is liable for two sin-offerings. If, however, he knew that these were ways in which false deities were served and that it is forbidden to perform these acts in service of a false deity, but did not know that a particular image was considered a false deity, because it was not made of gold or silver and he was under the mistaken impression that only images of gold and silver were considered as false deities and hence, performed all these acts of service to it, he is liable for only one sin-offering.
Halacha 2
A great general principle was stated with regard to the violation of the Sabbath prohibitions: Anyone who forgets the fundamental principle of the Sabbath, failing to recall that the Jews were commanded to observe the Sabbath or was captured and taken among gentiles while a child or converted in his childhood and remained living among gentiles, he is liable for only one sin-offering even though he performed many forbidden labors on many different Sabbaths, for it is all one lapse of awareness.
Similarly, he is liable for one sin-offering for all the forbidden fat that he ate, one sin-offering for all the blood that he ate. Similar laws apply to all analogous situations regarding these sins. Whenever one knows the fundamental principle of the Sabbath, but forgot that a given day was the Sabbath and thought it was an ordinary day, he is liable for only one sin-offering for the entire day, even though he performed many forbidden labors on it. Similarly, he is liable for a sin-offering for every Sabbath that he inadvertently desecrated.
Halacha 3
Anyone who knows that a given day is the Sabbath, but inadvertently performed forbidden labors without knowing that these labors are forbidden or knew that they were forbidden, but did not know that one was liable for karet for their violation, is liable for a sin-offering for every general category of forbidden labor. Even if he performed all 39 forbidden labors in one lapse of awareness, he must bring 39 sin-offerings.
Halacha 4
If he forgot that the day is the Sabbath and also forgot that these labors were forbidden, he is only liable for one sin-offering.
Halacha 5
When a person performs an action that is the primary forbidden activity of a particular category of labor and also a derivative in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Needless to day, if he performs many derivatives of one category of forbidden labor, he is only liable for one sin-offering.
Halacha 6
If he performs derivatives of one category of forbidden labor and derivatives of another category of forbidden labor in one lapse of awareness, it appears to me that he is liable for two sin-offerings.
Halacha 7
If he performs several activities comprising a single category of forbidden labor in one lapse of awareness, e.g., he sowed, extended a vine by replanting one of its branches, grafted a branch onto a tree, he is liable for only one sin-offering. In Hilchot Shabbat, it has already been explained which activities are primary labors, which are derivatives, and which activities comprise a single category of forbidden labor.
Halacha 8
When a person performs activities comprising a single category of forbidden labor on many Sabbaths, whether he was aware that it was the Sabbath, but unaware that he was performing forbidden labors or he was unaware that it was the Sabbath, but aware that the labor he performed is forbidden on the Sabbath, he is liable for a sin-offering for every forbidden labor he performs.
What is implied? He knew that it was the Sabbath and sowed on that day, because he did not know that sowing constituted forbidden labor. Similarly, on the following Sabbath, he knew that it was the Sabbath and planted because he did not know that planting constituted forbidden labor. Similarly, on the third Sabbath, he extended a vine, because he did not know that extending constituted forbidden labor, he is liable for a sin-offering for each one, even though they all comprise a single category of forbidden labor, because the different Sabbaths are considered like different bodies.
Halacha 9
When a person was unaware that it was the Sabbath and sowed upon it, although he knew that sowing is a forbidden labor, on the following Sabbath, he forgot that it was Sabbath and planted, although he knew that planting is a forbidden labor, and on the third Sabbath, he forgot that it was Sabbath and extended, although he knew that extending is a forbidden labor, he is liable for a sin-offering for every Sabbath. The rationale is that the days between each Sabbath are considered equivalent to gaining awareness of one's transgression and create a distinction.
Halacha 10
When a person harvested and ground a dried-fig-sized measure of grain without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden on the Sabbath, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Afterwards, he harvested and ground a dried-fig-sized measure of grain while aware that it is the Sabbath, but forgetting that these labors were forbidden, in which instance, he is liable for a sin-offering for every forbidden labor. He then became aware of the harvesting performed without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden on the Sabbath. In such an instance, the one act of harvesting draws the other after it and the one act of grinding draws the other after it. Thus it is as if he performed all four acts without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden on the Sabbath, in which instance he is liable for only one sin-offering. After he brings that sin-offering, he has secured atonement for all the other forbidden labors he performed. When he later becomes aware of them, he does not have to bring another sin-offering.
If, however, he first becomes conscious of the harvesting performed while aware that it is the Sabbath, but forgetting that these labors were forbidden, and brings a sin-offering, he receives atonement for the harvesting that he became aware of and on the harvesting and grinding performed without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden, because the two are considered as one labor and the harvesting and grinding are drawn after the harvesting performed when he was aware that it was the Sabbath. Thus there remains without atonement, only the grinding performed when he was aware that it was the Sabbath until he becomes aware of it and brings a second sin-offering.
If a person harvested half a dried-fig-sized measure without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that this labor is forbidden and then harvested half a dried-fig-sized measure while aware that it is Sabbath, but not aware that this labor is forbidden, these two activities are combined. One harvesting draws the other after it. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations with regard to the other forbidden labors.
Halacha 11
When, on the Sabbath, a person had the intent to cut an object that was already severed from the ground, but instead, cut an object that was connected to the ground, even though he had the intent to cut, since his desired intent was not fulfilled, he is exempt from a sin-offering. He is considered as one who is merely busying himself and the Torah forbade only purposeful labor, as we explained several times.
Halacha 12
The following rule applies when a person stirs coals on the Sabbath, in which instance, he extinguishes the upper ones and ignites the lower ones. If he intended to extinguish and ignite, he is liable for two sin-offerings. If he stirred the coals to become warm and they were ignited on their own, he is liable, because one is liable for performing a forbidden labor even if he has no need for the actual labor he performed, as explained in Hilchot Shabbat. Just as he is liable for karet for the intentional performance of forbidden labor, he is liable for a sin-offering for unintentional violation.
Shegagot - Perek 8
Halacha 1
Every transgression for which one is liable for a fixed sin-offering if he transgressed inadvertently carries liability for a provisional guilt-offering if he is unsure whether he violated it.
What does being unsure mean? If a person is in doubt whether he inadvertently violated this transgression or not, he is obligated to bring a guilt-offering, as Leviticus 5:17-18 states: "If he was unaware and became guilty, he shall bear his iniquity. He shall bring an unblemished ram from sheep, of the given value, as a guilt-offering." This is referred to as a provisional guilt-offering, for it brings atonement when the person is in doubt, tentatively, until he knows with certainty that he sinned inadvertently, at which time, he brings a sin-offering.
Halacha 2
A person is not liable for a provisional guilt-offering unless there is a prohibition that is established. What is implied? A person partook of forbidden fat, but was in doubt whether there was an olive-sized portion or not. There was a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of permitted fat before a person and he partook of one of them, but he did not know which one he ate. His wife and his sister were with him at home. He was intimate with one of them, but did not know with whom. Both the Sabbath and a weekday passed and he performed a forbidden labor on one of them, but did not know the day on which he acted. He performed a deed on the Sabbath, but did not know whether it falls into a category of forbidden labor. In all these and similar instances, he should bring a provisional guilt-offering.
If, however, a prohibition has not definitely been established, he is not liable for a provisional guilt-offering. Thus if there was one piece of fat before a person and he was unsure whether it was permitted or forbidden and he partook of it, he is exempt, for there is no established prohibition. Similarly, one who partakes of the fat of a ko'i is exempt from a provisional guilt-offering, for there is not an established prohibition.Similarly, when a man is intimate with a woman who is unsure whether or not she is in the niddah state or we are unsure whether she is an ervah due to family connections, he is exempt from a provisional guilt-offering.
Therefore a man who is intimate with a woman is exempt from this sacrifice, if: a) she finds blood on the examination cloth she uses after time has transpired, or
b) he married his yevamah within three months of his brother's death and she gave birth and it is not known whether the child was conceived by her first husband and was born after a nine-month pregnancy or he was conceived by her second husband and was born after a seven-month pregnancy.Similar laws apply in all analogous situations, for there is no established prohibition.
Halacha 3
An individual can be required to bring a provisional guilt-offering in the following circumstances:
a) he who ate a piece of fat and one witness states: "What you ate was forbidden fat," while the other states; "You did not partake of forbidden fat;
b) a woman said that he partook of forbidden fat and another woman said that he did not. Since he does not know whether he partook of the forbidden fat or not and the existence of the prohibited substance has been established, he is obligated to bring a provisional guilt-offering.
Similarly, if one was intimate with a married woman about whom one witness states: "Her husband died," but another states: "He did not die," he is obligated to bring a provisional guilt-offering. This law also applies when there is a question if a woman is divorced, for the prohibition was established.If, however, there is a doubt whether or not a woman was consecrated, one who is intimate with her is not liable, because the prohibition has not been established.
Halacha 4
A person is liable for a provisional guilt-offering in the following situations: There were two pieces of fat before him: one forbidden and one permitted. He ate one inadvertently and a gentile or a dog came and ate the second. The gentile or the dog ate the first and a Jew ate the second. One ate the first intentionally and the second, inadvertently, or he ate the first inadvertently and the second, intentionally. In all these situations, he is liable, because the existence of a prohibited substance had been established.
If, however, he partook of both of them intentionally, he is exempt from bringing a sacrifice. And if he ate them both inadvertently, he must bring a sin-offering. If he ate the first inadvertently and another person came and ate the second inadvertently, they are both obligated to bring a provisional guilt-offering. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 5
A transgressor is exempt from bringing a sacrifice in the following situations. There was a piece of forbidden fat and piece of notar before him. He ate one of them inadvertently, but did not know which one he ate. His wife who was in the niddah state and his sister were at home with him. He was intimate with one of them inadvertently, but did not know which one. The Sabbath and Yom Kippur followed directly after each other, he performed a forbidden labor in the twilight between them. He does not bring a sin-offering, because he does not know which transgression he performed, as we explained. Nor does he bring a provisional guilt-offering, because he knows with certainty that he transgressed.
Halacha 6
Whenever a person performs a deed that obligates him for one fixed sin-offering when he knows with certainty that he transgressed, he is liable for a provisional guilt-offering if he is unsure whether he transgressed. Whenever a person performs a deed that obligates him for many fixed sin-offerings when he knows with certainty that he transgressed, he is liable for many provisional guilt-offerings, matching the number of sin-offerings, if he is unsure whether he transgressed.
What is implied? Just as a person who ate forbidden fat, blood, notar, and piggul in one lapse of awareness is liable for four sin-offerings,so, too, if he is uncertain whether he partook of them or not, he must bring four provisional guilt-offerings. Similarly, if he is unsure if the woman with whom he was intimate is his wife or so-and-so, another woman who is forbidden to him as an ervah and for whom he would be liable eight sin-offerings if he was intimate with her, he must bring eight provisional guilt-offerings.
Halacha 7
When a person ate one of two pieces of fat and he was unsure whether he ate forbidden fat or permitted fat, and after that doubt arose in his mind, he ate another one of two pieces of fat and he was unsure whether he ate forbidden fat or permitted fat, he must bring two provisional guilt-offerings.
Halacha 8
Just as the definitive knowledge that one transgressed creates a distinction with regard to sin-offerings, so too, the awareness that one possibly transgressed creates a distinction with regard to provisional guilt-offerings. Therefore if one partook of five olive-sized portions of forbidden fat in one lapse of awareness and then became aware of the possibility that he sinned with regard to one of them and later, became aware of the possibility that he sinned with regard to a second one, and then with regard to the subsequent ones, he is liable for a provisional guilt-offering for each one.
Halacha 9
When there is a piece of permitted fat and a piece of forbidden fat and a person ate one of them without knowing which and thus brought a provisional guilt-offering and then partook of the second piece of fat, he must bring a sin-offering. If another person partook of the second piece, that second person must bring a provisional guilt-offering, as stated.
Halacha 10
When there is a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of forbidden fat that is notar and a person ate one of them without knowing which one, he must bring a sin-offering to atone for partaking of forbidden fat and a provisional guilt-offering because of the possibility that he partook of notar. If he ate the second piece in a second lapse of awareness, he must bring three sin-offerings. If the piece of notar was worth a p'rutah, he must also bring a definitive guilt-offering because of the misappropriation of consecrated articles.
If he ate one of the two pieces and another person came and ate the second, he should bring a sin-offering and a provisional guilt-offering and the second person should bring a sin-offering and a provisional guilt-offering. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
-------
Hayom Yom:
• Wednesday, Tammuz 18, 5774 • 16 July 2014
"Today's Day"
Wednesday, Tamuz 18, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Pinchas, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 88-89.
Tanya: Ch. 4. However, (p. 355) ...days and years! (p. 355).
The Alter Rebbe said of R. Moshe Vilenker:1 "Moshe has mochin d'gadlut, magnitude of intellect2 and in his ten years of toil3, he has attained through his labors a powerful, capacious, wide-ranging intellectuality - (mochin rechavim)."4
For three years R. Moshe Vilenker prepared himself for yechidus with the Alter Rebbe. Afterwards he remained in Lyozna for seven years to translate the yechidus into actual avoda.
FOOTNOTES
1. A giant among the early chassidim.
2. A mind capable of integrating even opposing concepts.
3. "Toil" and "labor," refer to enormous efforts in inner spiritual self-improvement.
4. The term mochin rechavim, lit. "broad intellect," defies translation. It does not refer to Reb Moshe's broad spectrum of knowledge or to "broadmindedness"; rather, it describes the nature (intense, powerful), absorptive ability (capacious), and breadth (wide-ranging) of his intellectuality - his faculty of intelligence.
-------
Daily Thought:
Where You Cannot Go
How can you know if you can lift this place up, or if it will pull you down?
Because we have a Torah, and the Torah is our guide. And we have sages of Torah, and they can instruct us. If the Torah says you must go, you must go. If the Torah says you cannot go, you cannot go.
No matter how great an opportunity it may seem, no matter how fantastic the immediate rewards may appear, you will not redeem the sparks, but only give more nurture to the darkness that holds them captive.(Second night of Pesach, 1958 (5718))
No comments:
Post a Comment