TODAY IN JEWISH HISTORY:
• PURIM TAMMUZ (ALGIERS) (1774)
In 1774, the Spanish General O'Reilly attacked the city of Algiers and was successfully repulsed by the Dey of Algiers, Mohammed ibn Uman. Tradition has it that flames came out of the graves of the great Rabbis Isaac ben Sheshet and Solomon ben Simon Duran and contributed to the Spanish defeat. To celebrate the miracle of having escaped Spanish rule, the Jews of Algiers instituted a "Purim" on the 11th of Tammuz.
Link:
Rabbi Isaac Bar Sheishes (Ribash)
DAILY QUOTE:
Just as a person can be sentenced to death only by a sanhedrin (tribunal) of twenty-three judges, so an ox that kills can be condemned to death only by a sanhedrin of twenty-three.(Mechilta D'Rashbi)
DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Pinchas, 4th Portion Numbers 27:6-27:23 with Rashi
• Chapter 27
6. The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: ו. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
7. Zelophehad's daughters speak justly. You shall certainly give them a portion of inheritance along with their father's brothers, and you shall transfer their father's inheritance to them. ז. כֵּן בְּנוֹת צְלָפְחָד דֹּבְרֹת נָתֹן תִּתֵּן לָהֶם אֲחֻזַּת נַחֲלָה בְּתוֹךְ אֲחֵי אֲבִיהֶם וְהַעֲבַרְתָּ אֶת נַחֲלַת אֲבִיהֶן לָהֶן:
Zelophehad’s daughters speak justly: As the Targum [Onkelos] יָאוּת, rightly. [As if God said,] This is the way this passage is inscribed before Me on high (Sifrei Pinchas 18). It teaches us that their eye perceived what Moses’ eye did not. - [see Mid. Tanchuma Pinchas 8]
כן בנות צלפחד דברת: כתרגומו יאות, כך כתובה פרשה זו לפני במרום, מגיד שראתה עינן מה שלא ראתה עינו של משה:
Zelophehad’s daughters speak justly: Their claim is just. Fortunate is the person with whose word the Holy One, blessed is He, concurs. - [Sifrei Pinchas 18]
כן בנות צלפחד דברת: יפה תבעו. אשרי אדם שהקב"ה מודה לדבריו:
You shall certainly give: [The double expression נָתֹן תִּתֵּן denotes] two portions: the portion of their father, who was among those who came out of Egypt, and the portion which he shared with his brothers in the property of [his father] Hepher. — [Sifrei Pinchas 19, B.B. 116b, 118b].
נתן תתן: שני חלקים, חלק אביהן, שהיה מיוצאי מצרים, וחלקו עם אחיו בנכסי חפר:
and you shall transfer: Heb. וְהַעֲבַרְתָּ, an expression denoting“anger” (עֶבְרָה) [for God is angry] when one does not leave a son to inherit him (B.B. 116a). Another interpretation: Since a daughter transfers an inheritance from one tribe to another, when her son or husband inherit from her, since [the prohibition of] “you shall not transfer an inheritance” (36:7) was directed only at that generation. The same [reason] applies to [the wording of the command] “you shall transfer the inheritance to his daughter” (verse 8). In the case of all of them it says, “you shall give over” but in the case of a daughter, it says, “you shall transfer.” - [Sifrei Pinchas 21]
והעברת: לשון עברה הוא במי שאינו מניח בן ליורשו. דבר אחר על שם שהבת מעברת נחלה משבט לשבט [שבנה ובעלה יורשין אותה. שלא תסוב נחלה לא נצטוה אלא לאותו הדור בלבד] וכן והעברתם את נחלתו לבתו, בכולן הוא אומר ונתתם, ובבת הוא אומר והעברתם:
8. Speak to the children of Israel saying: If a man dies and has no son, you shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter. ח. וְאֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל תְּדַבֵּר לֵאמֹר אִישׁ כִּי יָמוּת וּבֵן אֵין לוֹ וְהַעֲבַרְתֶּם אֶת נַחֲלָתוֹ לְבִתּוֹ:
9. If he has no daughter, you shall give over his inheritance to his brothers. ט. וְאִם אֵין לוֹ בַּת וּנְתַתֶּם אֶת נַחֲלָתוֹ לְאֶחָיו:
10. If he has no brothers, you shall give over his inheritance to his father's brothers. י. וְאִם אֵין לוֹ אַחִים וּנְתַתֶּם אֶת נַחֲלָתוֹ לַאֲחֵי אָבִיו:
11. If his father has no brothers, you shall give over his inheritance to the kinsman closest to him in his family, who shall inherit it. This shall remain a decreed statute, as the Lord commanded Moses. יא. וְאִם אֵין אַחִים לְאָבִיו וּנְתַתֶּם אֶת נַחֲלָתוֹ לִשְׁאֵרוֹ הַקָּרֹב אֵלָיו מִמִּשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ וְיָרַשׁ אֹתָהּ וְהָיְתָה לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְחֻקַּת מִשְׁפָּט כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:
to the kinsman closest to him in his family: Only [kin from] the father’s side is considered “family.” - [Sifrei Pinchas 22, B.B. 109b]
לשארו הקרב אליו ממשפחתו: ואין משפחה קרויה אלא משפחת האב:
12. The Lord said to Moses, "Go up to this mount Abarim and look at the land that I have given to the children of Israel. יב. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה עֲלֵה אֶל הַר הָעֲבָרִים הַזֶּה וּרְאֵה אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
Go up to this mount Abarim: Why is this [passage] juxtaposed here [with the previous passage]? When the Holy One, blessed is He, said, “You shall certainly give them…” (verse 7), he [Moses] said, “The Omnipresent commanded me to allocate the inheritance! Perhaps the decree has been annulled, and I will enter the Land?” The Holy One, blessed is He, said to him, “My decree remains as it was” (Mid. Tanchuma Pinchas 9). Another interpretation: Since Moses had entered the territories of the descendants of Gad and the descendants of Reuben, he rejoiced, saying, “It seems that the vow [made] regarding me has been annulled.” This can be compared to a king who decreed that his son could not enter the portals of his palace. He [the king] entered the gate, with him [the son] following; the courtyard, with him following; the foyer with him following. When he was about to enter the inner chamber, he said to him, “My son, from here on, it is forbidden for you to enter.” - [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
עלה אל הר העברים: למה נסמכה לכאן, כיון שאמר הקב"ה נתן תתן להם, אמר אותי צוה המקום להנחיל, שמא הותרה הגזירה ואכנס לארץ. אמר לו הקב"ה גזרתי במקומה עומדת. דבר אחר כיון שנכנס משה לנחלת בני גד ובני ראובן שמח ואמר כמדומה שהותר לי נדרי, משל למלך שגזר על בנו שלא יכנס לפתח פלטין שלו נכנס לשער והוא אחריו, לחצר והוא אחריו, לטרקלין והוא אחריו, כיון שבא ליכנס לקיטון, א"ל בני מכאן ואילך אתה אסור ליכנס:
13. And when you have seen it, you too will be gathered to your people, just as Aaron your brother was gathered. יג. וְרָאִיתָה אֹתָהּ וְנֶאֱסַפְתָּ אֶל עַמֶּיךָ גַּם אָתָּה כַּאֲשֶׁר נֶאֱסַף אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ:
just as Aaron your brother was gathered: From here [we see] that Moses yearned for a death like Aaron’s (Sifrei Pinchas 23). Another interpretation: You are no better than he (Mid. Tanchuma Pinchas 9); “because you did not sanctify…” Deut. 2:51). But if you had sanctified Me, your time to depart from the world would not yet have arrived. On each occasion that their death is mentioned, their sin is mentioned, for a decree had been pronounced against the generation of the desert, that they should die in the desert on account of their sin that they did not believe. Moses therefore requested that his sin be mentioned, so that it should not be said that he was one of those who rebelled. This is analogous to two women who were flogged by the court, one for immoral behavior [adultery] and the other for eating unripe produce of the sabbatical year [a lighter offense]…. Here too, wherever their death is mentioned, their sin is mentioned, to tell you that they had no [sin] other than this [sin] alone. - [Sifrei Pinchas 23, Yoma 86b]
כאשר נאסף אהרן אחיך: מכאן שנתאוה משה למיתתו של אהרן. דבר אחר אין אתה טוב ממנו, (דברים לב, נא) על אשר לא קדשתם, הא אם קדשתם אותי עדיין לא הגיע זמנכם להפטר. בכל מקום שכתב מיתתם כתב סרחונם, לפי שנגזרה גזרה על דור המדבר למות במדבר בעון שלא האמינו, לכך בקש משה שיכתב סרחונו, שלא יאמרו אף הוא מן הממרים היה. משל לשתי נשים שלוקות בבית דין אחת קלקלה ואחת אכלה פגי שביעית וכו', אף כאן בכל מקום שהזכיר מיתתן הזכיר סרחונם, להודיע שלא היתה בהם אלא זו בלבד:
14. Because you disobeyed My command in the desert of Zin when the congregation quarreled, [when you were] to sanctify Me through the water before their eyes; these were the waters of dispute at Kadesh, in the desert of Zin. יד. כַּאֲשֶׁר מְרִיתֶם פִּי בְּמִדְבַּר צִן בִּמְרִיבַת הָעֵדָה לְהַקְדִּישֵׁנִי בַמַּיִם לְעֵינֵיהֶם הֵם מֵי מְרִיבַת קָדֵשׁ מִדְבַּר צִן:
These were the waters of dispute at Kadesh: These [waters] alone; they [Moses and Aaron] had no other sin to their name (Sifrei Pinchas 23). Another interpretation: Those [waters] which instigated the rebellion [of the Israelites] at Marah were the same as those which caused the rebellion at the Red Sea [in Rephidim (Levush, Divrei David)], and those same ones provoked the rebellion in the desert of Zin. - [Source unknown]
הם מי מריבת קדש: הם לבדם אין בהם עון אחר. דבר אחר הם שהמרו במרה, הם היו שהמרו בים סוף, הם עצמם שהמרו במדבר צין:
15. Moses spoke to the Lord, saying: טו. וַיְדַבֵּר משֶׁה אֶל יְהֹוָה לֵאמֹר:
Moses spoke to the Lord…: This [verse comes] to let us know the virtues of the righteous, for when they are about to depart from the world, they disregard their own needs and occupy themselves with the needs of the community. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
וידבר משה אל ה' וגו': להודיע שבחן של צדיקים שכשנפטרין מן העולם מניחין צרכן ועוסקין בצרכי צבור:
saying: He said to Him, “Answer me whether You are appointing a leader for them or not.” - [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
לאמר: אמר לו השיבני אם אתה ממנה להם פרנס אם לאו:
16. "Let the Lord, the God of spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation, טז. יִפְקֹד יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵי הָרוּחֹת לְכָל בָּשָׂר אִישׁ עַל הָעֵדָה:
Let the Lord… appoint: When Moses heard that the Omnipresent told him to give Zelophehad’s inheritance to his daughters, he said, “It is time to ask for my own needs-that my son should inherit my high position.” The Holy One, blessed is He, said to him, That is not My intention, for Joshua deserves to be rewarded for his service, for he “would not depart from the tent” (Exod. 33:11). This is what Solomon meant when he said, “He who guards the fig tree eats its fruit” (Prov. 27:18). - [Mid. Tanchuma Pinchas 11]
יפקד ה': כיון ששמע משה שאמר לו המקום תן נחלת צלפחד לבנותיו אמר הגיע שעה שאתבע צרכי שיירשו בני את גדולתי. אמר לו הקב"ה לא כך עלתה במחשבה לפני, כדאי הוא יהושע ליטול שכר שמושו שלא מש מתוך האהל. וזהו שאמר שלמה (משלי כז, יח) נוצר תאנה יאכל פריה:
God of the spirits: Why is this said? He said to Him, “Master of the universe, the character of each person is revealed to you, and no two are alike. Appoint over them a leader who will tolerate each person according to his individual character.”- [Mid. Tanchuma Pinchas 10]
אלהי הרוחות: למה נאמר, אמר לפניו רבש"ע גלוי וידוע לפניך דעתו של כל אחד ואחד ואינן דומין זה לזה, מנה עליהם מנהיג שיהא סובל כל אחד ואחד לפי דעתו:
17. who will go forth before them and come before them, who will lead them out and bring them in, so that the congregation of the Lord will not be like sheep without a shepherd." יז. אֲשֶׁר יֵצֵא לִפְנֵיהֶם וַאֲשֶׁר יָבֹא לִפְנֵיהֶם וַאֲשֶׁר יוֹצִיאֵם וַאֲשֶׁר יְבִיאֵם וְלֹא תִהְיֶה עֲדַת יְהֹוָה כַּצֹּאן אֲשֶׁר אֵין לָהֶם רֹעֶה:
who will go forth before them: Not like the kings of the [gentile] nations, who sit at home and send their armies to war, but as I did, for I fought against Sihon and Og, as it says, “Do not fear him” (21:34), and as Joshua did, as it says, “Joshua went to him and said to him, Are you for us [or for our enemies]?” (Josh. 5:13). Similarly, concerning David it says, “For he went forth and came in before them” (I Sam. 18:16)-he went out [to battle] at their head and came in before them. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
אשר יצא לפניהם: לא כדרך מלכי האומות שיושבים בבתיהם ומשלחין את חיילותיהם למלחמה, אלא כמו שעשיתי אני שנלחמתי בסיחון ועוג, שנאמר (במדבר כא, לד) אל תירא אותו. וכדרך שעשה יהושע, שנאמר (יהושע ה, יג) וילך יהושע אליו ויאמר לו הלנו אתה וגו'. וכן בדוד הוא אומר (ש"א יח, טז) כי הוא יוצא ובא לפניהם, יוצא בראש ונכנס בראש:
who will lead them out: through his merits. - [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
ואשר יוציאם: בזכיותיו:
and bring them in: through his merits. - [Sifrei Pinchas 23] Another interpretation: “Who will bring them in” [means] that You should not do to him as You did to me, for I may not bring them into the Land. — [Num. Rabbah 21:15]
ואשר יביאם: בזכיותיו. דבר אחר ואשר יביאם שלא תעשה לו כדרך שאתה עושה לי, שאיני מכניסן לארץ:
18. The Lord said to Moses, "Take for yourself Joshua the son of Nun, a man of spirit, and you shall lay your hand upon him. יח. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה קַח לְךָ אֶת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר רוּחַ בּוֹ וְסָמַכְתָּ אֶת יָדְךָ עָלָיו:
Take for yourself: Encourage him verbally, [and say,] “Fortunate are you that you have merited to lead the children of the Omnipresent!” - [Sifrei Pinchas 23 on verse 22]
קח לך: קחנו בדברים אשריך שזכית להנהיג בניו של מקום:
for yourself: Someone verified by you, someone you know. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
לך: את שבדוק לך את זה אתה מכיר:
a man of spirit: As you requested; someone able to deal with the character of each one. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
אשר רוח בו: כאשר שאלת שיוכל להלוך כנגד רוחו של כל אחד ואחד:
and you shall lay your hand upon him: Provide him with an announcer so that he can expound [halachic discourses] during your lifetime, so they should not say about him that he dared not raise his head in the days of Moses. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
וסמכת את ידך עליו: תן לו מתורגמן שידרוש בחייך, שלא יאמרו עליו, לא היה לו להרים ראש בימי משה:
19. And you shall present him before Eleazar the kohen and before the entire congregation, and you shall command him in their presence. יט. וְהַעֲמַדְתָּ אֹתוֹ לִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן וְלִפְנֵי כָּל הָעֵדָה וְצִוִּיתָה אֹתוֹ לְעֵינֵיהֶם:
and you shall command him: Concerning Israel; be aware that they are troublesome and obstinate. [You accept office] on condition that you take upon yourself [all this]. - [See Sifrei Beha’alothecha 42]
וצויתה אתו: על ישראל, דע שטרחנין הם סרבנים הם, על מנת שתקבל עליך:
20. You shall bestow some of your majesty upon him so that all the congregation of the children of Israel will take heed. כ. וְנָתַתָּה מֵהוֹדְךָ עָלָיו לְמַעַן יִשְׁמְעוּ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
You shall bestow some of your majesty upon him: This refers to the radiance of the skin of his face (see Exod. 34:29).
ונתתה מהודך עליו: זה קירון עור פנים:
some of your majesty: But not all of your majesty. Thus, we learn that the face of Moses was [radiant] like the sun, whereas the face of Joshua was like the moon. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23, b.b. 75a]
מהודך: ולא כל הודך נמצינו למדין פני משה כחמה פני יהושע כלבנה:
so that all the congregation of the children of Israel will take heed: [meaning] that they will behave toward him with reverence and awe, just as they behaved toward you.
למען ישמעו כל עדת בני ישראל: שיהיו נוהגין בו כבוד ויראה כדרך שנוהגין בך:
21. He shall stand before Eleazar the kohen and seek [counsel from] him through the judgment of the Urim before the Lord. By his word they shall go, and by his word they shall come; he and all Israel with him, and the entire congregation." כא. וְלִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן יַעֲמֹד וְשָׁאַל לוֹ בְּמִשְׁפַּט הָאוּרִים לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה עַל פִּיו יֵצְאוּ וְעַל פִּיו יָבֹאוּ הוּא וְכָל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִתּוֹ וְכָל הָעֵדָה:
He shall stand before Eleazar the priest: Here is [the response to] the request that you made [that your children should inherit you]; this honor shall not depart from your father’s house, for even Joshua will have need for Eleazar. — [Mid. Tanchuma Pinchas 11]
ולפני אלעזר הכהן יעמד: הרי שאלתך ששאלת שאין הכבוד הזה זז מבית אביך, שאף יהושע יהא צריך לאלעזר:
and seek [counsel from] him: when he finds it necessary to go to war. - [Sanh. 16a]
ושאל לו: כשיצטרך לצאת למלחמה:
By his word: Eleazar’s [word].
על פיו: של אלעזר:
and the entire congregation: The Sanhedrin. — [Yoma 73b, Sanh. 16a]
וכל העדה: סנהדרין:
22. Moses did as the Lord had commanded him, and he took Joshua and presented him before Eleazar the kohen and before the entire congregation. כב. וַיַּעַשׂ משֶׁה כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֹתוֹ וַיִּקַּח אֶת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וַיַּעֲמִדֵהוּ לִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן וְלִפְנֵי כָּל הָעֵדָה:
and he took Joshua: He took him [by encouraging him] with words, and informed him of the reward in store for the leaders of Israel in the World to Come. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23]
ויקח את יהושע: לקחו בדברים והודיעו מתן שכר פרנסי ישראל לעולם הבא:
23. He laid his hands upon him and commanded him, in accordance with what the Lord had spoken to Moses. כג. וַיִּסְמֹךְ אֶת יָדָיו עָלָיו וַיְצַוֵּהוּ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְהֹוָה בְּיַד משֶׁה:
He laid his hands: generously; over and above what he had been commanded. For the Holy One, blessed is He, said to him,“and you shall lay your hand upon him” (verse 18), but he did it with both his hands. He fashioned him like a full and overflowing vessel, filling him with wisdom in abundance. — [Sifrei Pinchas 23, Sanh. 105b]
ויסמך את ידיו: בעין יפה יותר ויותר ממה שנצטווה. שהקב"ה אמר לו וסמכת את ידך, והוא עשה בשתי ידיו, ועשאו ככלי מלא וגדוש ומלאו חכמתו בעין יפה:
in accordance with what the Lord had spoken to Moses: [That is,] also with respect to the majesty; He bestowed some of his majesty [radiance] upon him.
כאשר דבר ה': אף לענין ההוד נתן מהודו עליו:
-------
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 60 - 65
• Chapter 60
This psalm tells of when Joab, David's general, came to Aram Naharayim for war and was asked by the people: "Are you not from the children of Jacob? What of the pact he made with Laban?" Not knowing what to answer, Joab asked the Sanhedrin. The psalm includes David's prayer for success in this war.
1. For the Conductor, on the shushan eidut. A michtam by David, to instruct,
2. when he battled with Aram Naharayim and Aram Tzovah, and Joab returned and smote Edom in the Valley of Salt, twelve thousand [men].
3. O God, You forsook us, You have breached us! You grew furious-restore us!
4. You made the earth quake, You split it apart-heal its fragments, for it totters!
5. You showed Your nation harshness, You gave us benumbing wine to drink.
6. [Now] give those who fear You a banner to raise themselves, for the sake of truth, Selah.
7. That Your beloved ones may be delivered, help with Your right hand and answer me.
8. God said with His Holy [Spirit] that I would exult; I would divide Shechem, and measure out the Valley of Succot.
9. Mine is Gilead, mine is Menasseh, and Ephraim is the stronghold of my head; Judah is my prince.
10. Moab is my washbasin, and upon Edom I will cast my shoe; for me, Philistia will sound a blast [of coronation].
11. Who will bring me into the fortified city? Who will lead me unto Edom?
12. Is it not You, God, Who has [until now] forsaken us, and did not go forth with our legions?
13. Grant us relief from the oppressor; futile is the salvation of man.
14. With God we will do valiantly, and He will trample our oppressors.
Chapter 61
David composed this prayer while fleeing from Saul. The object of all his thoughts and his entreaty is that God grant him long life-not for the sake of pursuing the pleasures of the world, but rather to serve God in awe, all of his days.
1. For the Conductor, on the neginat, by David.
2. Hear my cry, O God, listen to my prayer.
3. From the end of the earth I call to You, when my heart is faint [with trouble]: Lead me upon the rock that surpasses me!
4. For You have been a refuge for me, a tower of strength in the face of the enemy.
5. I will dwell in Your tent forever; I will take refuge in the shelter of Your wings, Selah.
6. For You, God, heard my vows; You granted the inheritance of those who fear Your Name.
7. Add days to the days of the king; may his years equal those of every generation.
8. May he sit always before God; appoint kindness and truth to preserve him.
9. Thus will I sing the praise of Your Name forever, as I fulfill my vows each day.
Chapter 62
David prays for the downfall of his enemies. He also exhorts his generation that their faith should not rest in riches, telling them that the accumulation of wealth is utter futility.
1. For the Conductor, on the yedutun,1 a psalm by David.
2. To God alone does my soul hope; my salvation is from Him.
3. He alone is my rock and salvation, my stronghold; I shall not falter greatly.
4. Until when will you plot disaster for man? May you all be killed-like a leaning wall, a toppled fence.
5. Out of their arrogance alone they scheme to topple me, they favor falsehood; with their mouths they bless, and in their hearts they curse, Selah.
6. To God alone does my soul hope, for my hope is from Him.
7. He alone is my rock and salvation, my stronghold; I shall not falter.
8. My salvation and honor is upon God; the rock of my strength-my refuge is in God.
9. Trust in Him at all times, O nation, pour out your hearts before Him; God is a refuge for us forever.
10. Men are but vanity; people [but] transients. Were they to be raised upon the scale, they would be lighter than vanity.
11. Put not your trust in exploitation, nor place futile hope in robbery. If [corrupt] wealth flourishes, pay it no heed.
12. God spoke one thing, from which I perceived two: That strength belongs to God;
13. and that Yours, my Lord, is kindness. For You repay each man according to his deeds.
Chapter 63
Hiding from Saul, and yearning to approach the place of the Holy Ark like one thirsting for water, David composed this prayer on his behalf and against his enemy.
1. A psalm by David, when he was in the Judean desert.
2. O God, You are my Almighty, I seek You! My soul thirsts for You, my flesh longs for You; [like one] in a desolate and dry land, without water,
3. so [I thirst] to see You in the Sanctuary, to behold Your might and glory.
4. For Your kindness is better than life; my lips shall praise You.
5. Thus will I bless you all my life, in Your Name I will raise my hands [in prayer].
6. As with fat and abundance my soul is sated, when my mouth offers praise with expressions of joy.
7. Indeed, I remember You upon my bed; during the watches of the night I meditate upon You.
8. For You were a help for me; I sing in the shadow of Your wings.
9. My soul cleaved to You; Your right hand supported me.
10. But they seek desolation for my soul; they will enter the depths of the earth.
11. They will drag them by the sword; they will be the portion of foxes.
12. And the king will rejoice in God, and all who swear by Him will take pride, when the mouths of liars are blocked up.
Chapter 64
The masters of homiletics interpret this psalm as alluding to Daniel, who was thrown into the lion's den. With divine inspiration, David foresaw the event and prayed for him. Daniel was a descendant of David, as can be inferred from God's statement to Hezekiah (himself of Davidic lineage), "And from your children, who will issue forth from you, they will take, and they (referring to, amongst others, Daniel) will be minesters in the palace of the king of Babylon."
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. Hear my voice, O God, as I recount [my woes]; preserve my life from the terror of the enemy.
3. Shelter me from the schemes of the wicked, from the conspiracy of evildoers,
4. who have sharpened their tongue like the sword, aimed their arrow-a bitter word-
5. to shoot at the innocent from hidden places; suddenly they shoot at him, they are not afraid.
6. They encourage themselves in an evil thing, they speak of laying traps; they say: "Who will see them?”
7. They sought pretexts; [and when] they completed a diligent search, each man [kept the plot] inside, deep in the heart.
8. But God shot at them; [like] a sudden arrow were their blows.
9. Their own tongues caused them to stumble; all who see them shake their heads [derisively].
10. Then all men feared, and recounted the work of God; they perceived His deed.
11. Let the righteous one rejoice in the Lord and take refuge in Him, and let them take pride-all upright of heart.
Chapter 65
This psalm contains awe-inspiring and glorious praises to God, as well as entreaties and prayers concerning our sins. It declares it impossible to recount God's greatness, for who can recount His mighty acts? Hence, silence is His praise.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David, a song.
2. Silence is praise for You, O God [Who dwells in] Zion; and to You vows will be paid.
3. O Heeder of prayer, to You does all flesh come.
4. Matters of sin overwhelm me; You will pardon our transgressions.
5. Fortunate is [the nation] whom You choose and draw near, to dwell in Your courtyards; may we be sated with the goodness of Your House, with the holiness of Your Sanctuary.
6. Answer us with awesome deeds as befits Your righteousness, O God of our salvation, the security of all [who inhabit] the ends of the earth and distant seas.
7. With His strength He prepares [rain for] the mountains; He is girded with might.
8. He quiets the roar of the seas, the roar of their waves and the tumult of nations.
9. Those who inhabit the ends [of the earth] fear [You] because of Your signs; the emergences of morning and evening cause [man] to sing praise.
10. You remember the earth and water it, you enrich it abundantly [from] God's stream filled with water. You prepare their grain, for so do You prepare it.
11. You saturate its furrows, gratifying its legions; with showers You soften it and bless its growth.
12. You crown the year of Your goodness [with rain], and Your clouds drip abundance.
13. They drip on pastures of wilderness, and the hills gird themselves with joy.
14. The meadows don sheep, and the valleys cloak themselves with grain; they sound blasts, indeed they sing.
-------
Tanya: Igeret HaTeshuva , beginning of Chapter 1
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Wednesday, Tammuz 11, 5774 • July 9, 2014
• Igeret HaTeshuva , beginning of Chapter 1
Introduction
By way of introduction to Iggeret HaTeshuvah it should be noted that the Alter Rebbe is known as1 “Master of the Tanya and Shulchan Aruch.” The Rebbe once remarked that “Master of the Tanya” means that the Alter Rebbe is2 an arbiter in the esoteric dimension of the Torah, and “Master of the Shulchan Aruch” signifies that3 his halachic rulings are authoritative.
Furthermore, the previous Lubavitcher Rebbe once stated in a public address4 that the four parts of Tanya correspond to the four sections of the Shulchan Aruch. In this connection the Rebbe gives an explanation — both according to Chassidut and according to the revealed strata of the Torah — of the relation between the third part of Tanya, Iggeret HaTeshuvah, and the third section of the Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer.
According to Chassidut the relation between the two is clarified by a statement in ch. 4 of Iggeret HaTeshuvah — that the lower and higher levels of teshuvah (which together encompass all the degrees of repentance) are respectively indicated by the lower and higher letters hei of the ineffable Name of G‑d. In terms of their spiritual personality, so to speak, these two letters are feminine: both are receptors, the higher hei (representing the level of Binah) being impregnated by Chochmah, and the lower hei (representing Malchut) being impregnated by the six emotive Sefirot. This feminine element connects Iggeret HaTeshuvah with Even HaEzer, which codifies the laws involving women.
As to the revealed plane of the Torah, we find that the Talmudic Tractate Gittin, which deals with the laws of divorce, precedes Tractate Kiddushin, which deals with the laws of marriage. In the introduction to his commentary on the Mishnah, Maimonides explains this order by quoting the verse,5 “When she leaves his house she may go and marry another man”; here, too, divorce precedes marriage. Historically, as well, the Midrash6 points out that the root of the word used by the Torah to say that G‑d7 banished Adam from the Garden of Eden ( ויגרש ) is the same as the root of the word for divorce ( גרושין). Accordingly, the Sages compare his state to that of “a Jewish divorcee,” who is permitted to remarry her former husband. And indeed, when G‑d later gave the Torah to the Jewish people he8 “sanctified us ( קדשנו) with His commands.” In the Holy Tongue this verb shares a common root with the word for marriage, or betrothal ( קדושין). In this connection the Alter Rebbe said above9 that G‑d’s having “sanctified us with His commands” parallels what a man declares when betrothing a wife: “You are hereby consecrated unto me.”
This dynamic — marriage in the wake of divorce — is echoed in the spiritual use of these terms. The connection to teshuvah is thus readily apparent: A “marriage” is conceivable after a state of “divorce” only when there was teshuvah in the interim. For as the Alter Rebbe stated earlier on,10 “Indeed, it is impossible for the wicked to begin to serve G‑d without first repenting for their past.”
In Scripture, too, we find repentance depicted as the reconcilement of a divorced couple, culminating in remarriage. For sin banishes the Shechinah, the Divine Presence, the Mother of all souls. In the words of the prophet,11 ובפשעיכם שלחה אמכם — “Because of your transgressions was your Mother sent away.” This is the selfsame verb that the Torah uses for divorce:12 ושלחה מביתו — “And he will send her away from his house.” And it is repentance that undoes this spiritual divorce, to the point that G‑d can ask His people the rhetorical question:13 “Where is your mother’s bill of divorce?” — for as a result of His people’s repentance, the divorce is annulled.
In the plainly manifest levels of the Torah as well, there is explicit evidence in the Gemara that repentance resembles remarriage following divorce. R. Yochanan teaches14 that repentance overrides a prohibition stated in the Torah, and cites the following verse:15 “If a man sends away his wife and she leaves him for another man, will he return to her again?.... Yet though you have strayed..., return to Me!” Thus, argues R. Yochanan, G‑d is saying here that repentance overrides the prohibition that16 “her first husband...may not remarry her” [if she married another man in the interim]. Here too, then, remarriage following divorce is a paradigm of repentance.
Thus, there is a clear correspondence between the third part of Tanya, Iggeret HaTeshuvah, and the third section of the Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer, which deals with the laws involving women.
תניא בסוף יומא: שלשה חלוקי כפרה הם
It has been taught in a Beraita at the end of Tractate Yoma:17 There are three types of atonement, varying according to the different categories of transgression,
ותשובה עם כל אחד
and repentance [necessarily] accompanies each of them.
עבר על מצות עשה ושב, אינו זז משם עד שמוחלין לו
If one failed to fulfill a positive commandment and repented, he is forgiven forthwith.
עבר על מצות לא תעשה ושב, תשובה תולה ויום הכפורים מכפר
If one violated a prohibitive commandment and repented, his repentance is tentative, and Yom Kippur atones.
In this instance repentance alone does not suffice to secure complete forgiveness; it only guarantees that he will not be punished until the arrival of Yom Kippur, at which time he is completely forgiven.
(פירוש: דאף על גב דלענין קיום, מצות עשה גדולה, שדוחה את לא תעשה
(18This means that though, in terms of fulfillment, a positive commandment is superior, for which reason it supersedes19 a prohibitive commandment,
When positive and negative commands conflict, the positive command takes precedence and overrides the prohibition. (For example: the wearing of tzitzit made of an admixture of wool and linen, despite the prohibition of kilayim, or shaatnez.) Since observing a positive command thus appears to be of more value than observing a prohibition, why do we say that if one transgresses a positive command repentance alone suffices, whereas if one transgresses a prohibition forgiveness cannot be secured by repentance alone, and one must await the advent of Yom Kippur?
The Alter Rebbe will now address himself to this question. His answer will also enable us to understand the spiritual effects of the performance of a positive command and the spiritual blemish that results from transgressing a negative command. Insight into the mitzvot from this perspective will in turn enable us to understand why a positive command supersedes a negative command, and why it is nevertheless more difficult to attain atonement for transgressing a negative command.
Briefly, the answer is as follows: When one performs a positive command he not only fulfills G‑d’s Will, but also draws down a flow of Divine light into the higher spiritual realms and upon his own soul. The reason: each positive command is likened to a bodily organ. (Note of the Rebbe: “As our Sages, of blessed memory, have said:20 ‘The 248 organs correspond to the 248 positive commands.’”)
This means to say that just as a bodily organ is a receptacle for the life-force which it elicits from the soul, so, too, is each positive commandment a vessel that draws down Divine effluence and vitality from the infinite Ein Sof-light. Moreover, just as the life-force of the soul is enclothed within the various limbs, so, too, does the life-force drawn down through the performance of a positive command become enclothed (i.e., internalized) within the worlds.
Fulfilling a negative command — by not committing the transgression — is also a fulfillment of the Divine Will. As our Sages, of blessed memory, have said:21 “If one passively refrains all his days from sin, he is rewarded (Note of the Rebbe: ‘but only’) as though he had actively performed a command.” However, since such performance does not result from any action on his part as in the case of a positive command — he merely fulfills G‑d’s Will by not transgressing — its result is of lesser spiritual value. For the purpose of Torah and mitzvot is to draw down Divine illumination through the performance of the 248 positive commands, and to dispel the spirit of impurity through the observance of the 365 prohibitions (as explained earlier in Part I, ch. 37, p. 492-3).
Thus, in a situation where positive and negative precepts clash and the question is which one is to be set aside, the positive command supersedes the negative. For it is impossible that doing the prohibited deed will impart a spirit of impurity, inasmuch as its prohibition is being overruled because the Torah so dictates. Conversely, (even) if the Torah were to direct that one should neglect the positive command, the action that would draw down Divine illumination would still be lacking.
For this reason a positive command supersedes a prohibition: the deficiency normally wrought by transgressing a prohibition does not result when the Torah commands that it be set aside, while the dividend gained by fulfilling a positive command — the drawing down of the Divine light — is realized.
However, in light of the above, it would seem that the same reasoning should apply with regard to transgressions: a higher degree of repentance should be necessary for violating a positive command than for transgressing a negative command — yet according to the above quotation from the Gemara in Yoma the opposite is true.
The explanation is as follows. The advantage of the positive command — the G‑dly light that it draws into the soul — cannot be won through repentance in any event; all that repentance can now secure is forgiveness for the transgression. Not so with regard to transgressing a prohibition, where repentance can rectify the misdeed entirely. Furthermore, since the misdeed actively blemished the individual’s soul and the celestial realms as well, mere repentance does not suffice: only Yom Kippur can completely obliterate the blemish that it brought about.
This is what the Alter Rebbe now goes on to say:
היינו משום שעל ידי קיום מצות עשה, ממשיך אור ושפע בעולמות עליונים מהארת אור אין סוף ברוך הוא
this superiority of the positive command that makes it supersede a negative command is so because by performing a positive command one precipitates an illumination and flow into the higher worlds from the reflected [infinite] Ein Sof-light
(כמו שכתוב בזהר: דרמ״ח פיקודין, אינון רמ״ח אברין דמלכא)
(22as we find in the Zohar:23 “The 248 positive commandments are the 248 ‘organs of the King’ ”),
The 248 positive commands are equated with the emotive attributes of Atzilut which are collectively termed “the King”. Just as an organ serves as a vessel to the soul-faculty enclothed within it, so, too, is each positive command an organ and vessel for a particular effluence of the emotive attributes of Atzilut that are drawn down through the performance of that particular commandment. Thus, through performing positive commands one draws down G‑dliness into the higher worlds.
וגם על נפשו האלקית
and also through the performance of a positive command one draws G‑dliness on to his Divine soul,
כמו שאומרים: אשר קדשנו במצותיו
as we say in the blessings that precede the performance of many mitzvot, “…Who has hallowed us with His commandments.”
I.e., fulfilling a positive command has the effect of drawing down Divine light and holiness upon the soul, for which reason it surpasses and supersedes conformity to a negative command.
אבל לענין תשובה
But concerning repentance, which would seek to rectify the transgression of a positive command,
אף שמוחלין לו העונש על שמרד במלכותו יתברך, ולא עשה מאמר המלך
though through repentance the punishment for rebelling against G‑d’s rule and not fulfilling the King’s word is commuted,
מכל מקום האור נעדר וכו׳
nonetheless, the illumination which would have been drawn down through the performance of the positive command is lacking — even after repentance, so that the sin remains only partially rectified.
וכמאמר רז״ל על פסוק: מעות לא יוכל לתקן, זה שביטל קריאת שמע של ערבית או וכו׳
On the verse,24 “A crookedness that cannot be corrected,” i.e., even through repentance, our Sages accordingly comment:25 “This relates to one who neglected the evening [or morning] reading of Shema, or [the evening or morning prayer].”
דאף שנזהר מעתה לקרות קריאת שמע של ערבית ושחרית לעולם
For though he be scrupulous henceforth about reading the morning and evening Shema forevermore, thereby demonstrating his regret,
אין תשובתו מועלת לתקן מה שביטל פעם אחת
his repentance is ineffectual in correcting what he once neglected.
For after all is said and done, the world will forever be lacking the unique gift of Divine light that he could have drawn down through reading the Shema on that particular occasion. Thus, all that repentance can accomplish he is now able to accomplish through repentance alone. No other steps can secure him any further atonement.
So much for him who transgressed a positive precept.
והעובר על מצות לא תעשה, על ידי שנדבק הרע בנפשו, עושה פגם למעלה בשרשה ומקור חוצבה
If one violates a prohibition in thought, speech or action, since thereby evil cleaves to his soul, he [also] impairs its Supernal root and source
(בלבושים די׳ ספירות דעשיה, כמו שכתוב בתקוני זהר: לבושין תקינת לון, דמינייהו פרחין נשמתין לבני נשא וכו׳)
(26in the garbs of the Ten Sefirot of Asiyah; as Tikkunei Zohar writes,27 “You have fashioned garbs for [the Sefirot], from which fly forth souls for man...”).
We thus see from Tikkunei Zohar that it is from the “garments”of the Sefirot that souls emanate; when a soul is blemished through sin, these garments are blemished as well.
לכך אין כפרה לנפשו, ולא למעלה, עד יום הכפורים
Therefore there is no atonement for his own soul nor Above until Yom Kippur,
As will be explained a little later, “atonement” means cleansing that which was blemished. This requires not only repentance, but in addition Yom Kippur:
כמו שכתוב: וכפר על הקדש מטומאות בני ישראל ומפשעיהם וגו׳, לפני ה׳ תטהרו
concerning which it is written,28 “He shall atone for the holy place because of the impurities of the Children of Israel and because of their sins...; before Havayah shall you be purified.”
לפני ה׳ דייקא
“Before G‑d” is stressed.
I.e., the purification granted by Yom Kippur emanates from a level that transcends the Divine Name Havayah, and can even atone for a blemish that resulted from transgressing a prohibitive command.
At any rate, we have seen that in certain respects transgressing a positive command has more serious consequences than transgressing a negative command.
ולכן אין ללמוד מכאן שום קולא, חס ושלום, במצוות עשה
Hence, one should not (G‑d forbid) infer any leniency in the positive commandments from this Beraita which states that one is immediately forgiven after repenting for having transgressed a positive command, while transgressing a negative command requires in addition the atonement of Yom Kippur;
ובפרט בתלמוד תורה
particularly ought one not infer any leniency in Torah study.
ואדרבה אמרו רז״ל: ויתר הקב״ה על עבודה זרה וכו׳, אף שהן כריתות ומיתות בית דין, ולא ויתר על ביטול תלמוד תורה)
On the contrary, our Sages assert,29 “G‑d has in certain instances glossed over [even] idolatry, [incest and murder], though excision and capital punishment are involved, but did not excuse the neglect of Torah study.”)30
The Beraita with which this chapter opened is now resumed:
עבר על כריתות ומיתות בית דין, תשובה ויום הכפורים תולין, ויסורים ממרקין
If one commits a sin [punishable by] excision or execution, repentance and Yom Kippur are tentative, so that the individual is not punished, and sufferings scour
(פירוש: גומרין הכפרה, והוא מלשון מריקה ושטיפה, לצחצח הנפש
(31i.e., they complete the atonement. [The verb] memarkin denotes the final stage, namely, scouring and rinsing, in order to “polish” the soul,
כי כפרה היא לשון קינוח, שמקנח לכלוך החטא)
for kaparah (“atonement”) is the term for the preceding stage of cleaning, removing the uncleanness of the sin),
Sins punishable by excision or execution are not cleaned away through repentance and Yom Kippur alone: the soul must also be scoured and rinsed through suffering, heaven forfend.
שנאמר: ופקדתי בשבט פשעם, ובנגעים עונם
as it is written,32 “With a rod shall I remember their sin, and with afflictions their iniquity.”
עד כאן לשון הברייתא
Thus far the Beraita with which this chapter opened.
FOOTNOTES
1. “Master of the Tanya” is the literal translation of the Heb. term, Baal HaTanya, meaning “author of the Tanya.”
2. An arbiter...Torah: In the original, א פוסק אין פנימיות התורה.
3. His halachic...authoritative: In the original, א פוסק אין נגלה דתורה.
4. Sefer HaSichot 5701, p. 142ff.
5. Devarim 24:2.
6. Bereishit Rabbah 21:8.
7. Bereishit 3:24.
8. From the liturgy, passim.
9. Ch. 46; this is further explained in ch. 10, below.
10. Ch. 17.
11. Yeshayahu 50:3.
12. Devarim 24:3.
13. Yeshayahu, loc. cit.
14. Yoma 86b.
15. Yirmeyahu 3:1.
16. Devarim 24:2.
17. Cf. 86a.
18. Parentheses are in the original text.
19. Yevamot 3b.
20. Makkot 23b.
21. Makkot 3:15.
22. Parentheses are in the original text.
23. Tikkunei Zohar 30.
24. Kohelet 1:15.
25. Cf. Berachot 26a.
26. Parentheses are in the original text.
27. Introduction.
28. Vayikra 16:16 and 16:30.
29. Yerushalmi, Chagigah 1:7.
30. The opening counterpart of this closing parenthesis appeared at the very beginning of the chapter: “(This means....”
31. Parentheses are in the original text.
32. Tehillim 89:23.
-------
Rambam:
• Daily Mitvah - Sefer Hamitzvos:
Wednesday, Tammuz 11, 5774 • July 9, 2014
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 125
Eating the Paschal Offering Boiled or Underdone
"Do not eat it underdone nor boiled in water"—Exodus 12:9.
It is forbidden to eat of a Paschal Offering that has been cooked or is underdone. Rather it must be fully roasted.
Eating the Paschal Offering Boiled or Underdone
Negative Commandment 125
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 125th prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating the Pesach offering cooked or underdone [in any liquid1] — only roasted.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not eat it raw or cooked."
I have already explained to you in the Ninth Introductory Principle of this work that one who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes.3
FOOTNOTES
1.Hilchos Korban Pesach 8:7.
2.Ex. 12:9.
3.Whether one eats only underdone meat, or only cooked meat, or both underdone and cooked meat, he receives one set of lashes. This is because it is a lav she'b'klalus, an inclusive prohibition.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 123
Removing the Paschal Offering from its Designated Location of Consumption
"You shall not take any of the meat out of the house"—Exodus 12:46.
It is forbidden to remove any part of the Paschal Offering from the home where those who are eating it have convened for the Passover meal.
Removing the Paschal Offering from its Designated Location of Consumption
Negative Commandment 123
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 123rd prohibition is that we are forbidden from taking out any meat of the Pesach offering from the place that we have gathered to eat it.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not bring any of its meat outside."
In the words of the Mechilta,3 "The expression, 'outside,' means outside the place where it is eaten."
One is prohibited to eat whatever is brought outside, and it is considered like treifah.4
Our Sages said in tractate Pesachim,5 "One who takes out meat of the Pesach offering from one group to another, even though he transgresses a prohibition, it is still pure." One who eats it [also] transgresses a prohibition."6
There7 it says, "One who takes out meat of the Pesach offering from one group to another is not punished unless he places it down. This is because the expression, 'to take out' [hotza'a] is used, just as regarding Shabbos.8 If he does place it down, he is punished by lashes.
The details of this mitzvah too are explained in the seventh chapter of Pesachim.
FOOTNOTES
1.The Pesach offering must be eaten by a specified group of people in a specified location. Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:1.
2.Ibid., 12:46.
3.Mechilta D'Rashbi.
4.See N181.
5.Pesachim 85a.
6.Even if it was brought back to the group, it may not be eaten; the meat is considered as treifah. See Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:2. Hilchos Ma'aseh HaKorbanos 11:6.
7.Ibid., 85b.
8.One may not carry an object outside on Shabbos, but is punished only if one performs both the akirah (lifting up the object from where it was sitting) and the hanachah (placing it down in the new location).
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 128
An Apostate Eating from the Paschal Offering
"No stranger shall eat of it"—Exodus 12:43.
It is forbidden to give an apostate to eat of the Paschal Offering.
An Apostate Eating from the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 128
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 128th prohibition is that we are forbidden from feeding meat from the Pesach offering to a Jew who has converted [to another religion].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "Any ben neichar2 may not eat it." The one who explains the Oral Tradition [i.e. Onkelos] says [the phrase, "Any ben neichar means], "any Jew who has converted."3 In the words of the Mechilta,4 "The phrase, 'Any ben neichar,' refers to a Jew who has converted and worshipped idolatry."5
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 12:43.
2.Literally, "son of a stranger."
3.Targum Onkelos, Ex. 12:43.
4.Mechilta D'Rashbi.
5.See Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:7, where the Rambam explains the expression ben neichar (literally, "son of a stranger") as meaning, "one who serves a strange god."
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 126
A Gentile Eating of the Paschal Offering
"A foreigner and a hired servant shall not eat it"—Exodus 12:45.
It is forbidden to give a gentile – even one who follows the Seven Noahide Laws – to eat of the Paschal Offering.
A Gentile Eating of the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 126
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 126th prohibition is that we are forbidden from feeding meat from the Pesach offering to [any non-Jew,1 even] a ger toshav.2
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement3 (exalted be He), "A toshav or [non-Jewish] hired hand may not eat it."
FOOTNOTES
1.Hilchos Korban Pesach 9:7.
2.A non-Jew who has accepted the 7 Noachide commandments. See N51, and footnotes there.
3.Ibid., 12:45.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 127
An Uncircumcised Male Eating of the Paschal Offering
"And no uncircumcised person shall eat of it"—Exodus 12:48.
An uncircumcised male is forbidden to partake of the Paschal Offering.
An Uncircumcised Male Eating of the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 127
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 127th prohibition is that an uncircumcised man is forbidden from eating the Pesach sacrifice.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "But no uncircumcised man may eat it."
If he eats from it when uncircumcised, he is punished by lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.This prohibition applies even if the man is a Jew who may not be circumcised for health reasons, i.e. a hemophiliac. (Rashi, Pesachim 28b.)
2.Ibid., 12:48.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 121
Breaking a Bone of the Paschal Offering
"Neither shall you break a bone of it"—Exodus 12:46.
It is forbidden to break any bone of the bones of the Paschal Offering.
Breaking a Bone of the Paschal Offering
Negative Commandment 121
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 121st prohibition is that we are forbidden from breaking any bone of the Pesach offering.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "Do not break any of its bones."
One who breaks one of its bones is punished by lashes. Our Sages explicitly said,2 "One who breaks a bone from a Pesach offering which was [brought when the congregation3 was] pure is punished by lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid., 12:46.
2.Pesachim Chapter 7, Mishneh 11.
3.If the offering was brought when the congregation was impure, one is not punished for breaking a bone. Hilchos Korban Pesach, 10:1.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 122
Breaking a Bone of the Second Passover Offering sacrifice
"Neither shall you break a bone of it"—Numbers 9:12.
It is forbidden to break any bone of the bones of the Second Passover Offering.
Breaking a Bone of the Second Passover Offering sacrifice
Negative Commandment 122
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 122nd prohibition is that we are also forbidden from breaking any bone of the second Pesach offering.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He) also here,1 "Do not break any of its bones."
One who breaks one of its bones is also punished by lashes.
Our Sages said in tractate Pesachim,2 "The Torah did not need to write, 'Do not break any of its bones,' regarding the second Pesach offering, since it is already written,3 'You shall follow all the laws of the [first] Pesach offering.'4 [It is written to include] both bones which contain marrow and those which do not contain marrow."5
The laws regarding breaking a bone [of the Pesach offering] are explained in the seventh chapter of Pesachim.6
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 9:12, like that of the first Pesach offering, Ex. 12:46.
2.85a.
3.Num. 9:12.
4.And this would include the prohibition of breaking any bones.
5.This is in contrast with the first Pesach offering, which excludes bones that do not contain marrow. Hilchos Korban Pesach 10:3. See, however, ibid., 10:15.
6.85a.
________________________________________
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter: Avadim Avadim - Chapter Seven
Avadim - Chapter Seven
Halacha 1
The wording of a bill of release must connote that it is severing the connection between the slave and his master, so that his master no longer has any rights with regard to him. Therefore, if a master writes to his slave: "You and everything I own except for such and such a property or such and such a garment are now your property," the connection between them is not severed. The bill of release is nullified. And since the bill of release is not effective, the slave is not freed and he does not acquire any of the property. The same principles apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 2
When a slave brings a bill of release that states: "Your person and my property are acquired by you," he acquires his own person and becomes a free man immediately. He does not, however, acquire the property until the authenticity of the signatures to the document are verified, as is the law with regard to other legal documents.
Similarly, if the document states: "All my property is acquired by you," he acquires his own person, but does not, however, acquire the property until the authenticity of the signatures to the document is verified. We divide the content of the document and say: "He acquires his own freedom, for we trust him when he brings his own bill of release, and he does not have to verify the authenticity of the document. With regard to property, a person does not acquire it unless he has clear proof of his ownership. Therefore, he does not acquire it until the authenticity of the document is verified.
Halacha 3
When a master frees two slaves with one bill of release, they do not acquire their freedom. Instead, one must write a bill of release for each slave individually.Therefore, if a person writes a single legal document transferring all his property to two slaves, they do not acquire even their own persons. If the master wrote two documents, one for each slave, they acquire the property and free each other.
When does the above apply? When the master wrote in each legal document: "All my property is given to so and so and so and so, my slaves." If, however, he writes: "Half of my property is given to so and so, my slave, and the other half is given to so and so, my slave," even if the owner wrote two documents, the slaves do not acquire anything. For the slaves are included in the master's property, and possession of half of each one is retained. Thus, this is not a valid release, and since the slave was not freed, he does not acquire any of the property.
Halacha 4
When a person seeks to release half of his slave with a bill of release, the slave does not acquire half of his person, and he is a slave just as he was before. If, by contrast, he releases half of a slave, because of a monetary payment - e.g., he took money for half his worth with the intent of freeing that half - the transaction is binding. Thus, he is half slave and half free man.
When does the above apply? When the master released half of the slave and retained half. If, however, he freed half of the slave with a legal document and sold the other half, or he freed half with a legal document and gave the other half as a present, since the slave leaves his domain entirely, the slave acquires half of his person, and he is half a slave and half a free man.
Similarly, when a slave is owned by two partners, and one frees his half - whether through money or through a legal document - the slave acquires his half, and he is half slave and half free man.
Halacha 5
When a master composes a bill of release for his maid-servant who is pregnant, stating "You are free, but your child-to-be remains a slave," his words are binding. If, however, it states: "You remain a maid-servant, but your child- to-be is free," it is of no consequence. For this is as if he freed half of the maid-servant using a legal document.
Halacha 6
With regard to a shifchah charufah: If the master desires to free her other half, making her a woman who is consecrated entirely, he may free her - whether with money or with a legal document. For even money completes her release.
Halacha 7
A person who is half slave and half free is not permitted to marry a Canaanite maid-servant, nor a free woman. Therefore, we compel his master to make him a free man. And we have a promissory note composed stating that the slave owes the master half his value.
When does the above apply? For a male slave. For a male is commanded to be fruitful and multiply. A maid-servant, however, should remain in her immediate state and serve her master one day, and herself the next. If sinners treat her loosely, we compel her master to free her. And we have a promissory note composed stating that she owes the master half her value.
Halacha 8
When a person is half slave and half free, and his master transferred the half he owns to his son who is below majority, so that the court would not be able to compel him to release him, the court appoints a guardian for the minor, and the guardian writes a bill of release. And we have a promissory note composed stating that the slave owes the master half his value.
If the minor needs the slave and has pangs of yearning for the slave, we separate him from him with money, for a minor has a great attraction for money.
Halacha 9
When a dying man who had a legal document composed, transferring all of his property to a servant, recovers, he regains possession of the property. He does not, however, regain possession of the servant, for he has already acquired the reputation of being a free man.
-------
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters: Korban Pesach Korban Pesach - Perek 6, Korban Pesach Korban Pesach - Perek 7, Korban Pesach Korban Pesach - Perek 8
Korban Pesach - Perek 6
Halacha 1
Which impure individuals are prevented from offering until the second Pesach? Anyone who cannot partake of the Paschal sacrifice on the fifteenth of Nisan because of his impurity, e.g., zavim, zavot, niddot, women impure because of childbirth, and those who were intimate with a women in the niddah state. By contrast, those who are impure because they touched an animal corpse, a dead crawling animal, and the like on the day of the fourteenth of Nisan, should immerse themselves and the Paschal sacrifice should be sacrificed on their behalf after they immerse themselves. In the evening, when the day of their impurity is concluded, they may partake of the Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 2
When the seventh day of the purification process of one who is impure because of contact with a human corpse falls on the fourteenth of Nisan - even though he has immersed himself and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him and thus he is fit to partake of sacrificial foods in the evening - the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered for him. His offering is postponed until the second Pesach. This is derived from Numbers 9:6 "And the men who were impure because of a human corpse and were not able to offer the Paschal sacrifice on that day." According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that this occurred on the seventh day of their purification process. This is what they were asking: Should the Paschal sacrifice be slaughtered for them and they would partake of it in the evening? Moses explained to them that it should not be slaughtered for them.
When does the above apply? When one became impure because of one of the types of impurity for which a Nazirite would be required to shave. If, however, one became impure because of other types of impurity resulting from contact with a corpse for which a Nazirite is not required to shave, the Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered for him on the seventh day of his purification process after he immersed himself and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him. In the evening, when the day of his impurity is concluded, he may partake of the Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 3
When a zav experiences two discharges and then counts seven clean days and immerses on the seventh day, the Paschal sacrifice may be sacrificed on his behalf and he may partake of it in the evening. If he experienced a zav discharge after the blood was cast on the altar, he is exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice.
Similarly, a woman who is watching a day because of a discharge on the previous day may immerse on the day she is watching, as explained in the laws of forbidden relations. The Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered on her behalf and she may partake of it in the evening. If she experiences uterine bleeding after the blood of the Paschal sacrifice was cast on the altar, she is exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice.
A Paschal sacrifice is not slaughtered on behalf of a woman who is impure because of menstrual bleeding on her seventh day of impurity. For she may not immerse herself until the night of the eighth day and she is not fit to partake of sacrificial meat until the night of the ninth day.
Halacha 4
When the day when one of those requiring atonement may bring his sacrifice falls on the fourteenth of Nisan, one may slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on their behalf. Their sacrifices may be offered on the fourteenth of Nisan, whether before the Paschal sacrifice is slaughtered or afterwards. They may partake of their Paschal sacrifices in the evening.
We do not slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on their behalf until they entrust their sacrifices required to regain purity to the court, lest they be negligent and fail to offer them.
Halacha 5
When the eighth day of the purification process of a person suffering from tzara'at falls on the fourteenth of Nissan, but he experiences a seminal emission that day, he may immerse himself, enter the Women's Courtyard, and bring his sacrifices. Although a person who immersed on a particular day is forbidden from entering the Temple Courtyard that day, as was explained in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash.since this is the day that the Paschal sacrifice is to be offered at its appointed time, a positive commandment whose omission is punishable by karet comes and supersedes a Rabbinic commandment.
Halacha 6
When the seventh day of the purification process of one who became impure due to contact with a human corpse falls on the Sabbath, the ashes of the Red Heifer are not sprinkled upon him until the following day. Even if his seventh day falls on the thirteenth of Nisan which is a Sabbath, the sprinkling of the ashes should be postponed until the fourteenth. The ashes should be sprinkled upon him, but the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf, as we explained. Instead, his offering is postponed and he brings the second Paschal sacrifice.
One might argue: The prohibition against sprinkling the ashes on the Sabbath was instituted as a shvut and the failure to bring the Paschal sacrifice is punishable by karet. How then could the Sages uphold their prohibition in the face of a prohibition punishable by karet? In resolution, it can be explained that the day on which he is forbidden to have the ashes sprinkled upon him is not the time when the sacrifice punishable by karet is obligated to be brought. Therefore they upheld their words as instituted, even though this matter will lead to it having to stand in a place punishable by karet.
Halacha 7
When an uncircumcised Jew circumcises himself on the day before Pesach, the Paschal sacrifice sacrifice may be slaughtered on his behalf after his circumcision. The Paschal sacrifice should not, by contrast, be slaughtered on behalf of a convert who converted on the fourteenth of Nisan and circumcised himself and immersed in a mikveh, for he may not partake of the sacrifice in the evening. He is like one who departs from a grave who requires seven days of purification and then can he become pure. This is a decree lest this convert become impure due to contact with a corpse in the following year on the fourteenth of Nisan and immerse himself and seek to partake of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening, saying: "Last year, the Jews did this for me, when I circumcised myself and immersed, and partook of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening."
Behold, this decree is of Rabbinic origin and the failure to bring the Paschal sacrifice is punishable by karet. How then could the Sages uphold their prohibition in the face of a prohibition punishable by karet on the day of the sacrifice which is the fourteenth of Nisan? The rationale is that the convert is not obligated in the observance of mitzvot until he circumcises himself and immerses himself in a mikveh. He should not immerse himself until he becomes healed from the circumcision, as we explained with regard to the concept of conversion. Therefore they upheld their words in this instance, because this person who circumcised himself should not have immersed until he was healed. Thus he would not have incurred an obligation to bring the Paschal sacrifice at all.
Halacha 8
If a person came through a beit hapras, he should proceed and sift, proceed and sift. If he did not find a bone and did not contract impurity, he should slaughter and partake of his Paschal sacrifice, even though he walked in a beit hapras. The rationale is that the impurity of a beit hapras is a Rabbinic institution, as will be explained in Hilchot Tum'at Meit, and the Sages did not uphold their decree in the face of an obligation punishable by karet, as we explained. Similarly, a beit hapras that was trod upon is pure with regarding to bringing a Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 9
A person in the acute state of onein mourning is fit to partake of the Paschal sacrifice in the evening. The rationale is that the restrictions of aninut at night are Rabbinic in origin and our Sages did not uphold their decree in the face of an obligation punishable by karet. Instead, the Paschal sacrifice should be slaughtered on his behalf. He must immerse and afterwards partake of it. The immersion is necessary so that he makes a distinction from the state of aninut and does not divert his attention.
When does the above apply? When the deceased for whom he must mourn passes away after midday on the fourteenth of Nisan and thus he was already obligated to bring the Paschal sacrifice. If, however, the deceased passed away before midday, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf. Instead, his offering is postponed until the second Pesach. If, however, the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf and the blood poured on the altar, he should immerse himself and partake of it in the evening.
If the deceased relative passed away on the thirteenth of Nisan and was buried on the fourteenth, on the day of the burial, he must observe aninut according to Rabbinic decree and that decree does not encompass the night following the fourteenth. Therefore one may slaughter the Paschal sacrifice on his behalf. He should immerse and partake of it and other sacrifices in the evening. The day when one hears of a close relative's death and the day when one gathers the bones of one's dead is equivalent to the day of burial. Therefore if one had the bones of his dead gathered on the fourteenth of Nisan or heard that a close relative died, the Paschal sacrifice may be slaughtered on his behalf. He immerses himself and may partake of sacrificial food in the evening.
Halacha 10
When a person is digging in a mound from an avalanche in search of the body of a deceased person, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf, lest he find a corpse in the mound and he be impure at the time of slaughter. If the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf and a corpse was not found, he may partake of the sacrifice in the evening.
The following rules apply if the corpse was discovered after the blood was poured on the altar. If it became known to him that he was certainly impure at the time the blood was poured, e.g., the mound was round, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. If the matter is in doubt, i.e., maybe he was not standing over the impurity at the time the blood was poured and did not become impure until afterwards, he is exempt from the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 11
The following rules apply when a person journeyed on a road and later a corpse was discovered lying across the width of the road. If the corpse could be deemed as the impurity likened to the depths, even though the person is considered as impure with regard to terumah, he is considered as pure with regard to the Paschal sacrifice. He may slaughter and partake of the Paschal sacrifice even though it is possible that he touched the corpse.Since the impurity is likened to the depths, he is pure with regard to the Paschal sacrifice. Even though the corpse is intact and extends from one end of the path to the other, he may offer his Paschal sacrifice unless he knows with certainty that he became impure because of it.
When does the above apply? When he was walking on foot, for it is possible that he did not touch it. If, however, he was riding on a beast or carrying a burden, he is impure even though it is impurity likened to the depths, for it is impossible that he will not have touched, moved, or stood over the corpse. We have already explained impurity likened to the depths in Hilchot Nizirut.
Halacha 12
When a person offered the Paschal sacrifice under the presumption that he was pure and afterwards, it was discovered that he was impure due to impurity likened to the depths, he is not obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. This is a law conveyed by the Oral Tradition. If, however, it becomes known to him that he was impure due to impurity that was known, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 13
When a person contracted impurity from a human corpse and had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled upon him on the third and seventh day [as required, but on his seventh day he unknowingly became impure because of a grave "likened to the depths" and brought a Paschal sacrifice under the presumption that he was pure and afterwards, he discovered that he had contracted the impurity "likened to the depths," he is not obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice, for once he immersed himself on the seventh day, his initial impurity ceased. If, however, he had contracted the impurity "likened to the depths" on the sixth day of his impurity and without knowing, he brought a Paschal sacrifice, he is obligated in the second Paschal sacrifice. The rationale is that a person who is impure must operate under the presumption that he is impure until he has definitely become pure, because there is a basis for the presumption of his impurity.
Korban Pesach - Perek 7
Halacha 1
The following rules apply when there were many individuals who were ritually impure due to contact with a human corpse on the first Pesach. If they were the lesser portion of the Jewish people, their offering is postponed to the second Pesach like other impure individuals. If, however, the majority of the Jewish people were impure due to contact with a human corpse or the priests or the sacred utensils were impure due to contact with a human corpse, their offering is not postponed. Instead, they should all offer the Paschal sacrifice in a state of ritual impurity, those ritually impure together with those who are pure.
This is derived from Numbers 9:6 which states: "And the men who were impure because of contact with the corpse of a human soul." Implied is that the offerings of individuals are postponed until the second Pesach, but those of the community are not postponed. This concept applies only with regard to the ritual impurity associated with a human corpse, as explained in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash.
Halacha 2
If the Jewish people were half ritually pure and half impure, they should all offer the sacrifice on the first Pesach. Those who are pure offer the sacrifice by themselves in a state of ritual purity and those who are impure offer it by themselves in a state of impurity and partake of it in impurity. If the impure outnumbered the pure even by one, they should all offer it in impurity.
Halacha 3
If the men were half impure due to contact with a human corpse and half pure and when you count the women together with the men, the majority will be pure, those who are pure should offer the first Paschal sacrifice. Those who are impure do not bring neither the first Paschal sacrifice or the second. They do not bring the first, because they are the lesser portion of the people. And they do not bring the second, because the women's offering of the second Paschal sacrifice is a matter of choice. Thus the impure persons are merely half the people and half the people do not bring the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 4
If the majority of the Jewish people were zavim, afflicted by tzara'at, or had relationships with niddot and the lesser portion were impure due to contact with a human corpse, those impure because of contact with a corpse should not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, because they are the lesser portion of the people. Nor do they offer the second, because individuals do not bring the second except at the time the majority of the people offered the first Paschal sacrifice. In this instance, since the majority of the Jewish people did not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, the lesser portion who are impure because of contact with a corpse should not bring the second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 5
If the majority of the Jewish people were impure because of contact with a human corpse and a lesser portion were zavim and the like, those who are impure because of contact with a corpse offer the first Paschal sacrifice, Those who are zavim and the like do not offer either the first Paschal sacrifice or the second. They do not offer the first, because the restrictions against offering in a state of impurity were suspended with regard to communal offerings only for those impure due to contact with a human corpse. Nor do they bring the second, because a second Paschal sacrifice is brought only when the first was brought in a state of ritual purity. If the first was brought in a state of impurity, there is no second offering.
Halacha 6
The following laws apply when a third of the Jewish people were pure, a third were zavim and the like, and a third were impure because of contact with a human corpse. Those who were impure because of contact with a corpse should not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, nor the second. They do not offer the first, because they are the lesser portion when compared to the aggregate of those who are pure and the zavvim. They should not offer the second, because the lesser portion of the people offered the first, as we explained.
How do we calculate whether the majority of the people are impure or pure? We do not make a calculation of all those who seek to partake of it, because it is possible that 20 people will be enumerated on one Paschal sacrifice and they will send it with one person to slaughter it on their behalf. Instead, we calculate all of those who seek to enter the Temple Courtyard while they are outside. Before the first group enters the Temple Courtyard, the calculation is made.
Halacha 7
When an individual becomes impure because of a questionable situation regarding ritual impurity in a private domain, as will be explained in the appropriate place, his offering is postponed until the second Pesach. When the majority of the Jewish people become impure because of a questionable situation in a private domain, they should all offer it in a state of impurity.
Halacha 8
When the Paschal sacrifice was offered in a state of impurity, it should also be eaten in a state of impurity, for from the outset, it was brought only to be eaten. It may not be eaten by all those who are impure, only by those impure because of contact with a human corpse. For them, this impurity is suspended. This also applies to those impure because of contact with other sources of impurity.
Those who are impure because of an impurity that results from a physical condition, e.g., zavvim, zavot, niddot, women after childbirth, those afflicted by tzara'at, should not partake of it. If, however, they do partake of it, they are exempt. According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that when a sacrifice is eaten by those who are pure, those who are impure are liable for partaking of it in impurity. When it is eaten by those who are impure, there is no liability for partaking of it in impurity. Even if those who are impure because of contact with a human corpse partook of the fats and organs to be offered on the altar, they are exempt.
When does the statement that a Paschal sacrifice may be eaten while ritually impure apply? When the people became impure before the blood was poured on the altar.If, however, they became impure after the blood was poured, it should not be eaten.
Halacha 9
If the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered in a state of ritual purity and the majority of the Jewish people became impure before its blood was poured on the altar, the blood should be poured on the altar, but the Paschal sacrifice should not be eaten. This is a Rabbinical decree lest the majority of the people become impure after the blood was poured in a following year and it be eaten in a state of impurity.
The following rules apply if the sacred utensils were impure because of [contact with a dead crawling animal or the like. Although the sacred utensils do not cause the persons to become impure, as will be explained in the appropriate place, since they cause the meat to become impure, the Paschal sacrifice should only be brought by those who are pure and it should be eaten, even though it is impure. It is preferable that it be eaten when the meat is impure thus superseding only an ordinary negative prohibition than it be eaten by individuals whose bodies are impure. That would be a prohibition punishable by karet, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.
Korban Pesach - Perek 8
Halacha 1
Partaking of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice on the night of the fifteenth of Nisan is a positive commandment, as Exodus 12:8 states: "And you shall eat the meat on this night, roasted on the fire. With matzot and bitter herbs shall you eat it."
Halacha 2
Matzah and bitter herbs are not indispensable elements of the mitzvah. If one did not find matzah or bitter herbs, he fulfills his obligation by eating the meat of the Paschal sacrifice alone. There is no mitzvah to partake of bitter herbs without the Paschal sacrifice, as implied by Numbers 9:11: "Eat it with matzot and bitter herbs."
Halacha 3
The optimum manner of performing the mitzvah is to partake of the Paschal sacrifice when one is already sated. Therefore if one sacrificed festive peace-offerings on the fourteenth of Nisan, one should partake of them first and then partake of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice to be satiated from the festive offering. Even if one does not eat more than an olive-size portion, he fulfills his obligation.
Similarly, partaking of the second Paschal sacrifice on the fifteenth of the month of Iyar is a positive commandment, as stated: "Eat it with matzot and bitter herbs."
Halacha 4
Both of them are eaten only roasted with fire. One who partakes of an olive-sized portion from their meat lightly-roasted or cooked in liquid on the nights of Pesach is liable for lashes, as Exodus 12:9 states: "Do not partake of it lightly-roasted or cooked in water." If one partook of a Paschal sacrifice that was both lightly-roasted and cooked, he is liable for only one set of lashes, because both these forbidden activities are included in one prohibition.
If, before nightfall, one partakes of a Paschal sacrifice that was lightly-roasted or cooked, he is not liable for lashes, as can be inferred for the continuation of the above verse: "except roasted in fire." Implied is that at the time it is a mitzvah to partake of the sacrifice roasted, one is liable for partaking of it lightly-roasted or cooked. If one partook of a sacrifice prepared in this manner while it was still day, he is exempt.
Halacha 5
If one partook of an olive-sized portion of a roasted Paschal sacrifice while it is still day, he violates a positive commandment, as Exodus 12:8 states: "And they shall eat the meat on that night," i.e., at night and not during the day. A prohibition resulting from a positive commandment is considered as a positive commandment.
Halacha 6
The term na which the Torah mentioned in its prohibition refers to meat which began to be subjected to fire. It became roasted slightly, but was not yet fit for human consumption. If, however, one partakes of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice while raw, he is not liable for lashes, but he did nullify a positive commandment, for it is written: "roasted with fire." Implied is that if it is not roasted, it is prohibited.
If one roasted it to the full extent until it became charred, he is exempt.
Halacha 7
The term "cooked" which the Torah mentioned in its prohibition refers to cooking the meat in water, other liquids, or fruit juice. The use of the phrase bashail mevushal by Exodus 12:9 includes all types of cooking.
Halacha 8
If one roasted it and afterwards cooked it, cooked it and afterwards, roasted it, or pot-roasted it, and partook of it, he is liable. It is, however, permitted to apply wine, oil, honey, other liquids, and fruit juice to it, but not water. After it is roasted, it is permitted to dip the meat in liquids and in fruit juice.
Halacha 9
One may not roast the Paschal sacrifice on a stoneware utensil or a metal utensil, for it is written: "roasted with fire," i.e., and not roasted by anything else. Therefore if the utensil was perforated so that the fire could affect the meat, one may roast with it. One may not roast it with a metal spit, because the entire spit will be hot and will roast the meat where it touches it.
Halacha 10
When one kindles an oven, removes all the fire, and then hangs the Paschal sacrifice in the oven and roasts it, it is forbidden to partake of it, because this is not "roasted with fire." If the sacrificial animal was cut up and hung over coals, it is considered "roasted with fire." If he roasted it over lime, clay, or the hot springs of Tiberias, it is forbidden, because this is not "roasted with fire."
How is the animal offered as a Paschal sacrifice roasted? One pierces it from its mouth until its anus with a wooden spit and hangs it in an oven with the fire beneath it.. One hangs its legs and its intestines in the oven, outside of it. One should not place them inside of its body cavity, for this is comparable to cooking. They would choose a pomegranate spit to roast it so that it will not cast its sap into the meat and cook it.
Halacha 11
If the meat touches the earthenware sides or floor of the oven, one should skin off that place, because it is roasted because of the earthenware.
Halacha 12
If its juices drip on the earthenware and then return to it, that place should be cut off. For any juice and liquid which it emits while being roasted is forbidden, for it is not roasted meat.
Halacha 13
If its juices drip on flour, he should take a handful from the place the juice fell and discard it.
Halacha 14
The following laws apply if one applied oil that is terumahto the Paschal sacrifice. If the company was made up of priests, they should partake of it. If the company was made up of Israelites and the meat is still raw, it should be washed and dried and then it may be roasted. If it has been roasted, the outer portion should be skinned off.
If oil from the second tithe was applied to it, one should not charge the other members of the company for its value, for the second tithe should not be redeemed in Jerusalem, as explained in the appropriate place.
We do not roast two Paschal sacrifices together lest they become intermingled. This applies even to a goat and a lamb.
Halacha 15
We already stated in several places that the Paschal sacrifice should be eaten only until midnight to distance a person from transgression. According to Scriptural Law, one may partake of it throughout the entire night until dawn.
We already explained in Hilchot Chametz UMatzah that the Paschal sacrifice requires the recitation of Hallel during the time that it is being eaten and that the members of the company do not partake of the meat after they fell asleep, even if they did so at the beginning of the night.
-------
Hayom Yom:
• Wednesday, Tammuz 11, 5774 • 09 July 2014
"Today's Day"
Wednesday, Tamuz 11, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Balak, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 60-65.
Tanya: IGERES HATESHUVAH. Ch. 1. Tanya (p. 343) ... Thus far the Beraita, (p. 345).
In the Tanya edition published in Zolkvi in the year m'vasseir tov ("Herald of Good," numerically equivalent to 5559, or 1799), the first version of Igeret Hateshuva was printed. It was not divided into chapters and there are variances (from the present text) in content.
-------
Daily ThoughtTop Down, Ground Up(from the upcoming book “Wisdom to Fix the Earth”)
Entering within, there are two paths of healing before you: From the top down, or from the ground up.
Working top-down, you see nothing but good, you do nothing but kindness, and you spread wisdom and light everywhere. The divine, lost sparks are drawn to you as to a magnet, leaping into the fire of their own accord, consumed in totality.
The transformation you achieve is astounding. But it does not last. The sparks dance only to the light of your fire; as soon as it begins to fade, they fall back to their places. Nothing has really changed. The darkness returns, perhaps yet more powerful from your nurture.
Working from the ground up, you enter within the world that holds those sparks in captivity and become part of it.
You do not ignore the beast within you; you recognize it, speak with it, eventually convincing it to look up to the heavens and realize that it is not the sum total of all that is.
You do not ignore the world around you; you deal with it head-on, on its own terms. Only that “all your deeds are for the sake of heaven,” and “in all your ways, you know Him.”
This transformation is real and lasting, because it comes from within.(Maamar Padah B’Shalom 5722 (also 5659, 5704, 5712); Maamar Vayakhel 5714.)
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment