Today's Laws & Customs:
Elul Observances
As the last month of the Jewish year, Elul is traditionaly a time of introspection and stocktaking -- a time to review one's deeds and spiritual progress over the past year and prepare for the upcoming "Days of Awe" of Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur.
As the month of Divine Mercy and Forgiveness (see "Today in Jewish History" for Elul 1) it is a most opportune time for teshuvah ("return" to G-d), prayer, charity, and increased Ahavat Yisrael (love for a fellow Jew) in the quest for self-improvement and coming closer to G-d. Chassidic master Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi likens the month of Elul to a time when "the king is in the field" and, in contrast to when he is in the royal palace, "everyone who so desires is permitted to meet him, and he receives them all with a cheerful countenance and shows a smiling face to them all."
Specific Elul customs include the daily sounding of the shofar (ram's horn) as a call to repentance. The Baal Shem Tov instituted the custom of reciting three additional chapters of Psalms each day, from the 1st of Elul until Yom Kippur (on Yom Kippur the remaining 36 chapters are recited, thereby completing the entire book of Psalms). Click below to view today's Psalms.
Chapter 40 Chapter 41 Chapter 42
Elul is also the time to have one's tefillin and mezuzot checked by an accredited scribe to ensure that they are in good condition and fit for use.
Links: More on Elul
Today in Jewish History:
DAILY QUOTE:
DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Parshat Ki Tavo, 3rd Portion (Deuteronomy 26:16-26:19) with Rashi
• Chapter 26
16. This day, the Lord, your God, is commanding you to fulfill these statutes and ordinances, and you will observe and fulfill them with all your heart and with all your soul. טז. הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מְצַוְּךָ לַעֲשׂוֹת אֶת הַחֻקִּים הָאֵלֶּה וְאֶת הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים וְשָׁמַרְתָּ וְעָשִׂיתָ אוֹתָם בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשֶׁךָ:
This day, the Lord your God is commanding you: Every day, you shall regard the commandments as if they are brand new, as though you are just today being commanded regarding them!- [Tanchuma 1]
היום הזה ה' אלהיך מצוך: בכל יום יהיו בעיניך חדשים, כאלו בו ביום נצטוית עליהם:
You will observe and fulfill them: A heavenly voice is blessing you:“You have brought the firstfruits today- [so] will you merit to bring them next year!”
ושמרת ועשית אותם: בת קול מברכתו הבאת בכורים היום, תשנה לשנה הבאה:
17. You have selected the Lord this day, to be your God, and to walk in His ways, and to observe His statutes, His commandments and His ordinances, and to obey Him. יז. אֶת יְהֹוָה הֶאֱמַרְתָּ הַיּוֹם לִהְיוֹת לְךָ לֵאלֹהִים וְלָלֶכֶת בִּדְרָכָיו וְלִשְׁמֹר חֻקָּיו וּמִצְוֹתָיו וּמִשְׁפָּטָיו וְלִשְׁמֹעַ בְּקֹלוֹ:
You have selected… has selected you: Heb. הֶאֱמַרְתָּ… הֶאמִירְךָ. We do not find any equivalent expression in the Scriptures [which might give us a clue to the meaning of these words]. However, it appears to me that [the expression הֶאֱמִיר] denotes separation and distinction. [Thus, here, the meaning is as follows:] From all the pagan deities, you have set apart the Lord for yourself, to be your God, and He separated you to Him from all the peoples on earth to be His treasured people. [Notwithstanding,] I did find a similar expression [to הֶאֱמִיר], which denotes “glory,” as in the verse “[How long will] all workers of violence praise themselves (יִתְאַמְּרוּ)?” (Ps. 94:4).
האמרת: והאמירך (פסוק יח) אין להם עד מוכיח במקרא ולי נראה שהוא לשון הפרשה והבדלה הבדלתי לך מאלהי הנכר להיות לך לאלהים, והוא הפרישך אליו מעמי הארץ להיות לו לעם סגולה ומצאתי להם עד והוא לשון תפארת כמו יתאמרו כל פועלי און (תהלים צ"ד, ד):
18. And the Lord has selected you this day to be His treasured people, as He spoke to you, and so that you shall observe all His commandments, יח. וַיהֹוָה הֶאֱמִירְךָ הַיּוֹם לִהְיוֹת לוֹ לְעַם סְגֻלָּה כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר לָךְ וְלִשְׁמֹר כָּל מִצְוֹתָיו:
as He spoke to you: When He said]: “And [out of all the nations,] you shall be to Me a treasure” (Exod. 19:5). - [Mechilta 12:78]
כאשר דבר לך: והייתם לי סגולה (שמות יט, ה):
19. and to make you supreme, above all the nations that He made, [so that you will have] praise, a [distinguished] name and glory; and so that you will be a holy people to the Lord, your God, as He spoke. יט. וּלְתִתְּךָ עֶלְיוֹן עַל כָּל הַגּוֹיִם אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לִתְהִלָּה וּלְשֵׁם וּלְתִפְאָרֶת וְלִהְיֹתְךָ עַם קָדשׁ לַיהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֵּר:
And so that you will be a holy people… as He spoke: [When He said]:“And you shall be holy to Me” (Lev. 20:26). - [Mechilta 12:78]
ולהיתך עם קדוש וגו' כאשר דבר: והייתם לי קדושים (ויקרא כ, כו):
___________________________
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 72-76
• Special Custom for the Month of Elul and High Holidays
The Baal Shem Tov instituted a custom of reciting three additional chapters of Psalms each day, from the 1st of Elul until Yom Kippur (on Yom Kippur the remaining 36 chapters are recited, thereby completing the entire book of Psalms).
See below for today's additional chapters.
Chapter 72
David composed this psalm for Solomon, praying that he be granted the wisdom to provide justice for the poor.
1. For Solomon. O God, impart Your justice to the king, and Your righteousness to the son of the king.
2. May he judge Your people with righteousness, Your poor with justice.
3. May the mountains bear peace to the nation, also the hills, in [reward for their] righteousness.
4. May he judge the nation's poor, save the children of the destitute, and crush the oppressor,
5. so that they will fear You as long as the sun [shines] and the moon endures, generation after generation.
6. May [his words] descend like rain upon cut grass, like raindrops that water the earth.
7. In his days may the righteous flourish, with much peace until the moon is no more.
8. And may he rule from sea to sea, and from the river until the ends of the earth.
9. May nobles kneel before him, and may his enemies lick the dust.
10. The kings of Tarshish and the islands will return tribute, the kings of Sheba and Seba will offer gifts.
11. All kings will bow to him, all nations will serve him;
12. for he rescues the needy one who cries out, the poor one who has no one to help him.
13. He pities the impoverished and needy, and saves the souls of the destitute.
14. He redeems their soul from deception and violence, and their blood is precious in his eyes.
15. He revives [the poor], and gives him of the gold of Sheba; and so [the poor] pray for him always, and bless him all day.
16. May there be abundant grain in the land, upon the mountaintops; may its fruit rustle like the [cedars of] Lebanon, and may [people] blossom from the city like the grass of the earth.
17. May his name endure forever; may his name be magnified as long as the sun [shines]. And all nations will bless themselves by him, they will praise him.
18. Blessed is the Lord God, the God of Israel, Who alone performs wonders.
19. Blessed is His glorious Name forever, and may the whole earth be filled with His glory, Amen and Amen.
20. The prayers of David, son of Jesse, are concluded
Chapter 73
This psalm addresses the question of why the righteous suffer while the wicked prosper, and prays for an end to our long exile. Read, and you will find repose for your soul.
1. A psalm by Asaph. Truly God is good to Israel, to the pure of heart.
2. But as for me, my feet nearly strayed; in an instant my steps would have been swept aside.
3. For I envied the revelers when I saw the tranquility of the wicked.
4. For there are no bonds1 to their death, and their health is sound.
5. They have no part in the toil of men, nor are they afflicted like other mortals;
6. therefore they wear pride as a necklace; their bodies are enwrapped in violence.
7. Their eyes bulge from fat; they surpassed the fantasies of their heart.
8. They consume [others], and talk wickedly of oppression-from on high do they speak.
9. They set their mouths against Heaven, while their tongues walk upon the earth.
10. Therefore His people return here,2 and suck the full [cup of bitter] waters.
11. And they say, "How can it be that God knows? Is there knowledge in the Most High?”
12. Behold these are the wicked, and they are ever tranquil, they have gained much wealth.
13. Surely in vain have I purified my heart, and washed my hands in cleanliness;
14. for I was afflicted all day, and my rebuke came each morning.
15. Were I to say, "I shall tell it like it is," behold I would turn the generation of Your children to rebels.
16. And when I pondered to understand this, it was unjust in my eyes;
17. until I came to the sanctuaries of God, and perceived their end.
18. Only on slippery places do You set them, You cast them into darkness.
19. How they have become desolate in an instant! They came to an end, they were consumed by terrors,
20. like a dream upon awakening. O my Lord, disgrace their image in the city.
21. When my heart was in ferment, and my mind was sharpened,
22. I was a boor and did not understand, like an animal was I with You.
23. Yet I was always with You; You held my right hand.
24. Guide me with Your counsel, and afterward, receive me with honor.
25. Whom do I have in heaven [besides You]? And when I am with You I desire nothing on earth.
26. My flesh and my heart yearn; God is the rock of my heart and my portion forever.
27. For behold, all those who are far from You perish, You cut down all who stray from You.
28. But as for me, the nearness of God is my good; I have put my trust in my Lord, God, that I may recount all Your works.
Chapter 74
The psalmist mourns and weeps over all the synagogues and study halls that have been burned: the Philistines destroyed the Tabernacle of Shiloh; Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the first Temple. We have been in exile for so long, without seeing any signs of redemption! When will the redemption come? Read, and you will find lamentation and consolation.
1. A maskil1 by Asaph. Why, O God, have You abandoned us forever, does Your wrath fume against the sheep of Your pasture?
2. Remember Your congregation which You acquired long ago, the tribe of Your inheritance whom You redeemed [and brought to] Mount Zion, where You rested Your Presence.
3. Lift Your steps to inflict eternal ruin, because of all the evil done by the enemy in the Sanctuary.
4. Your foes roared in the midst of Your meeting place; they considered their omens to be [genuine] signs.
5. The axes in the thicket of trees2 were reckoned as bringing [an offering] to the Above.
6. And now, all her ornaments together are smashed by hammer and hatchet.
7. They set Your Sanctuary on fire; they desecrated the Abode of Your Name to the ground.
8. Their rulers thought together in their hearts; they burned all the meeting places of God in the land.
9. We have not seen our signs; there is no longer a prophet, and there is none among us who knows how long.
10. How long, O God, will the adversary disgrace, will the enemy blaspheme Your Name forever!
11. Why do You withdraw Your hand, even Your right hand? Cast it out from within Your bosom!
12. For God is my King from long ago, working salvations in the midst of the earth.
13. In Your might, You divided the sea; You shattered the heads of the sea-monsters on the waters.
14. You crushed the heads of the Leviathan,3 leaving him as food for the nation [wandering in] the wilderness.
15. You split [the rock, bringing forth] fountain and brook; You dried up mighty streams.
16. Yours is the day, the night is also Yours; You established the moon and the sun.
17. You set all the boundaries of the earth; summer and winter-You created them.
18. Remember this, how the enemy reviled the Lord, and the vile nation blasphemed Your Name.
19. Do not give the soul of Your turtledove to the wild beast; do not forget the life of Your poor forever.
20. Look to the covenant, for the dark places of the earth are filled with dens of violence.
21. Do not turn back the oppressed in disgrace; [then] the poor and needy will praise Your Name.
22. Arise, O God, champion Your cause; remember Your insults from the perverse all day long.
23. Forget not the voice of Your adversaries; the tumult of Your opponents ascends always.
Chapter 75
How great is Israel! During their holidays they do not engage in frivolity, but in song and praise, and the study of the holiday's laws. Also, when they proclaimed (at the giving of the Torah), "We will do and we will hear!" they allowed the world to remain in existence. This psalm also admonishes those who indulge in worldly pleasures and attribute their prosperity to their own efforts.
1. For the Conductor, a plea not to be destroyed. A psalm by Asaph, a song.
2. We gave thanks to You, O God, we gave thanks; and Your Name was near [when] they1 told of Your wonders.
3. When I choose the appointed time, I will judge with fairness.
4. When the earth and all its inhabitants were melting, I established its pillars forever.
5. I said to the perverse, "Do not pervert [Israel]," and to the wicked, "Do not raise your pride.”
6. Do not raise your pride heavenward, nor speak with an arrogant neck
7. For not from the east or the west, nor from the desert does greatness come.
8. For God is Judge; He humbles one, and elevates the other.
9. For there is a cup [of punishment] in the hand of the Lord, with strong wine of full mixture; He pours from this, and all the wicked of the earth will drink, draining even its dregs.
10. But as for me, I will tell of it forever; I will sing to the God of Jacob.
11. I will cut off all glory of the wicked, but the glory of the righteous will be raised up.
Chapter 76
This psalm contains the prophecy of when the vast army of Sennacherib was seized with a deep slumber that rendered the hands of the soldiers powerless to raise their weapons; thus did they all fall in battle.
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music, a psalm by Asaph, a song.
2. God is known in Judah, His Name is great in Israel.
3. His Tabernacle was in Shalem,1 and His dwelling place in Zion.
4. There He broke the flying arrows of the bow, the shield, the sword and battle-forever.
5. You are illumination, mightier than the mountains of prey.
6. The stout-hearted were without sense, they slept their sleep, and all the warriors were unable to find their strength.
7. At Your rebuke, O God of Jacob, chariot and horse were stunned.
8. You, awesome are You! Who can stand before You once You are enraged.
9. From heaven You let the verdict be heard; the earth feared and was still,
10. when God rose to pass judgement, to save all the humble of the earth forever.
11. The anger of man will cause us to thank You;2 You will restrain the residue of wrath.
12. Make vows to the Lord your God and fulfill them; all who surround Him will bring tribute to the Awesome One.
13. He cuts down the spirit of nobles; He is awesome to the kings of the earth.
Additional Three Chapters
The Baal Shem Tov instituted a custom of reciting three additional chapters of Psalms each day, from the 1st of Elul until Yom Kippur (on Yom Kippur the remaining 36 chapters are recited, thereby completing the entire book of Psalms).
Today's Chapters are 40, 41 and 42.
Chapter 40
The psalmist speaks of the numerous wonders that God wrought for the Jewish people, asking: "Who can articulate His might? I would relate and speak of them, but they are too numerous to recount!" He created the world and split the sea for the sake of Israel, [yet] He desires no sacrifices, only that we listen to His voice.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. I put my hope in the Lord; He turned to me and heard my cry.
3. He raised me from the turbulent pit, from the slimy mud, and set my feet upon a rock, steadying my steps.
4. He put a new song in my mouth, a hymn to our God; multitudes will see and fear, and will trust in the Lord.
5. Fortunate is the man who has made the Lord his trust, and did not turn to the haughty, nor to those who stray after falsehood.
6. You have done much, O You, Lord my God-Your wonders and thoughts are for us; none can compare to You; should I relate or speak of them, they are too numerous to recount!
7. You desired neither sacrifice nor meal-offering, but [obedient] ears You opened for me; You requested neither burnt-offering nor sin-offering.
8. Then I said, "Behold, I come with a Scroll of the Book written for me."1
9. I desire to fulfill Your will, my God; and Your Torah is in my innards.
10. I proclaimed [Your] righteousness in a vast congregation; behold I will not restrain my lips-O Lord, You know!
11. I did not conceal Your righteousness within my heart; I declared Your faithfulness and deliverance; I did not hide Your kindness and truth from the vast congregation.
12. May You, Lord, not withhold Your mercies from me; may Your kindness and truth constantly guard me.
13. For countless evils surround me; my sins have overtaken me and I cannot see; they outnumber the hairs of my head, and my heart has abandoned me.
14. May it please You, Lord, to save me; O Lord, hurry to my aid.
15. Let those who seek my life, to end it, be shamed and humiliated together; let those who desire my harm retreat and be disgraced.
16. Let those who say about me, "Aha! Aha!" be desolate, in return for their shaming [me].
17. Let all those who seek You exult and rejoice in You; let those who love Your deliverance always say, "Be exalted, O Lord!”
18. As for me, I am poor and needy; my Lord will think of me. You are my help and my rescuer; my God, do not delay!
Chapter 41
This psalm teaches many good character traits, and inspires one to be thoughtful and conscientious in giving charity-knowing to whom to give first. Fortunate is he who is thoughtful of the sick one, providing him with his needs.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. Fortunate is he who is thoughtful of the poor, [for] the Lord will save him on the day of evil.
3. The Lord will guard him and keep him alive; he will be praised throughout the land; You will not deliver him to the desires of his enemies.
4. The Lord will support him on the bed of illness; You will turn him over in his bed all throughout his sickness.
5. I said, "Lord, be gracious to me! Heal my soul, for I have sinned against You!”
6. My foes say that evil [awaits] me: "When will he die, and his name perish?”
7. And if one comes to see [me], he speaks insincerely, for his heart gathers iniquity for himself, and when he goes out he speaks of it.
8. Together they whisper against me-all my enemies; against me they devise my harm, [saying]:
9. "Let his wickedness pour into him; now that he lies down, he shall rise no more.”
10. Even my ally in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread, has raised his heel over me.
11. But you, Lord, be gracious to me and raise me up, and I will repay them.
12. With this I shall know that You desire me, when my enemies will not shout gleefully over me.
13. And I, because of my integrity, You upheld me; You set me before You forever.
14. Blessed is the Lord, the God of Israel, to all eternity, Amen and Amen.
Chapter 42
This psalm awakens the hearts of the Children of Israel who do not feel the immense ruin, loss, and bad fortune in their being exiled from their Father's table. Were they wise, they would appreciate their past good fortune in coming thrice yearly, with joy and great awe, to behold God during the festivals, free of adversary and harm. May God place mercy before us from now to eternity, Amen Selah.
1. For the Conductor, a maskil1 by the sons of Korach.
2. As the deer cries longingly for brooks of water, so my soul cries longingly for You, O God!
3. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God. When will I come and behold the countenance of God?
4. My tears have been my bread day and night, when they say to me all day, "Where is your God?”
5. These do I recall, and pour out my soul from within me: how I traveled [to Jerusalem] in covered wagons; I would walk leisurely with them up to the House of God, amid the sound of rejoicing and thanksgiving, the celebrating multitude.
6. Why are you downcast, my soul, and why do you wail within me? Hope to God, for I will yet thank Him for the deliverances of His countenance.
7. My God! My soul is downcast upon me, because I remember You from the land of Jordan and Hermon's peaks, from Mount Mitzar.2
8. Deep calls to deep3 at the roar of Your channels; all Your breakers and waves have swept over me.
9. By day the Lord ordains His kindness, and at night His song is with me, a prayer to the God of my life.
10. I say to God, my rock, "Why have You forgotten me? Why must I walk in gloom under the oppression of the enemy?”
11. Like a sword in my bones, my adversaries disgrace me, when they say to me all day, "Where is your God?”
12. Why are you downcast, my soul, and why do you wail within me? Hope to God, for I will yet thank Him; He is my deliverance, [the light of] my countenance, and my God.
____________________________
Tanya: Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 15
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
Tuesday, 14 Elul 5774 • 9 September 2014
Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 15
The subject of this letter, the Ten Sefirot of the World of Atzilut and of the other worlds, is a fundament of both Kabbalah and Chassidut.
All the worlds are both created and conducted by means of the Sefirot, the emanations by which the various attributes of Divinity become manifest. Thus we find in the discourse beginning Patach Eliyahu,1 “You are He Who has brought forth ten ‘garments’, and we call them ten Sefirot, through which to direct hidden worlds which are not revealed, and revealed worlds.”
The Ten Sefirot demonstrate both G d’s infinite power (Ko’ach HaBli-Gvul) and His finite power (Ko’ach HaGvul). For, as is pointed out by the author of Avodat HaKodesh,2 “The Or Ein Sof (‘the [infinite] Ein Sof-light’) is שלימותא דכולא (‘the completeness of everything,’ or: ‘the most complete entity of all’): hence, just as He has infinite power, so too does He have finite power. For if you were to say that He possesses infinite power but lacks finite power then you minimize His completeness — and He is the most complete entity of all.”
It is within the Sefirot that infinity and the finite first coalesce, as it were, in order for worlds to be created and directed. For the Sefirot are composed of both orot (“lights”) and kelim (“vessels”). The orot of the Sefirot are simple and formless. Since they are not limited by specific characteristics (such as Chochmah or Chesed), they reflect G d’s infinite power as revealed within the Sefirot. The kelim, by contrast, do have specific characteristics, and thereby reveal G d’s power of limitation and finitude. It is thus through the Sefirot that the Ein Sof-light, which is by definition infinite, creates and conducts the finite worlds.
Since both the orot and the kelim which together comprise the Sefirot are utterly united with the Ein Sof-light, for3 “He and His orot are One; He and His kelim are One,” it is possible for the worlds to be created and animated by the Ein Sof and still be finite — for, as explained above, the Sefirot are infused with a capability for finitude.
The garbing of the Ein Sof-light within the Sefirot is known as “man”, as in the verse,4 “And upon the likeness of the throne there was a likeness of man,” for “man” denotes a visage comprising ten Sefirot.
The Kabbalah deals mainly with the Sefirot as they exist in the Supernal worlds, as in the World of Atzilut. In addition to the above, Chassidut gives closer attention to the Sefirot insofar as they appear as the ten corresponding faculties of a Jew’s soul, which derive and evolve from them.5 Thus, on the one hand, the middah (the mortal attribute or spiritual emotion) of Chesed, for example, derives from the Supernal Sefirah of Chesed, and so on. But conversely, too, when a Jew utilizes the ten soul-powers within him in his divine service here below, he is able to affect their source, the Sefirot of the higher worlds.
The knowledge and understanding of the Ten Sefirot Above as well as the knowledge of the evolvement of the worlds, is in itself “a great and lofty mitzvah,” as the Alter Rebbe writes below in Kuntres Acharon.6 This understanding leads to a love and fear of G d, which are the source and root that motivate the performance of all mitzvot, as explained in Likkutei Torah.7 Moreover, a comprehension of the Sefirot and their corresponding soul-powers inspires a Jew’s spiritual service with vitality, and elevates it.
להבין משל ומליצה, דברי חכמים וחידותם, בענין הספירות
“To understand the allegory and metaphor, the words of the wise and their riddles,”8 with respect to the Sefirot:
The commentaries note that “allegory and metaphor” refers to the Written Torah, which includes allegorical passages which are true at both the allusive and the literal levels. An example would be,9 “Seek life with the woman whom you love.” Although in this context “woman” is a metaphor for the wisdom of the Torah, the verse retains its simple meaning as well.
The commentaries note further that “the words of the wise and their riddles” refers to the Oral Torah: “the words of the wise” refers to those things that are revealed to all, while “their riddles” refers to those things which need to be revealed and solved.
By applying this phrase to the Sefirot, the Alter Rebbe is indicating that the Sefirot contain all four levels — allegory, metaphor, words of the wise, and riddles, for the Sefirot are found both Above in the spiritual worlds, as well as within a Jew’s soul.
מודעת זאת בארץ, מפי קדושי עליון, נשמותיהם עדן
It is known10 “throughout the land” from the mouth of heavenly saints, may their souls rest in Eden,
לקרב קצת אל השכל מאי דכתיב: ומבשרי אחזה אלוה
enabling us to somewhat comprehend the verse,11 “And from my flesh shall I behold G d,”
שהכוונה היא להבין קצת אלקותו יתברך, מנפש המלובשת בבשר האדם
that [this verse] speaks of a partial understanding of G d’s blessed Divinity from [a consideration of] the soul which is vested in the flesh of man.
This refers only to the dimension of the soul that animates the body, for, as the Rebbe notes, the essence of the soul, like the spirituality that transcends this world at large, remains incomprehensible to man.
ועל פי מאמר רז״ל על פסוק: ברכי נפשי וגו׳
This [correspondence between the soul and its Creator] accords with the teaching of our Sages,12 of blessed memory, on the verse,13 “Give praise, my soul, [to G d]”:
מה הקב״ה כו׳, אף הנשמה כו׳
“Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, [permeates the world,] so does the soul [permeate the body].”
Since the Sages go on to enumerate other similarities between the soul and G d, it is clear that from the soul we are able to catch a glimpse of things as they exist Above.
But how, indeed, can we possibly compare the soul to G d?
The Alter Rebbe therefore goes on to quote the Zohar: The soul derives from the innermost aspect of G dliness, thus sharing characteristics with the Supernal Sefirot and with Divinity itself. We are therefore able to understand G dliness through the analogy of the soul.
ועל פי מאמר הזהר על פסוק: ויפח באפיו נשמת חיים
[This correspondence likewise] accords with the teaching of the Zohar14 on the verse,15 “And He blew into his nostrils a soul of life”:
מאן דנפח, מתוכיה נפח
“He who blows, blows from within him,” i.e., from his inwardness and his innermost being.
Unlike speech, which utilizes only the external aspect of the speaker’s breath, blowing emits the innermost breath. Thus, when Scripture states that “He blew into his nostrils a soul of life,” it means to indicate that the soul derives from the innermost aspects of G dliness, as explained in Iggeret HaTeshuvah, ch. 4.
ואפילו נפש דעשיה, היא באה מזיווג ז״א ונוקבא דעשיה
For even a Nefesh (i.e., a soul of the lowest grade) of Asiyah (i.e., the lowest world) derives from the union of Za (ז״א: the initials of זעיר אנפין, i.e., the bracket of six masculine middot, or emotive attributes) with nukva (i.e., the feminine attribute called Malchut) of Asiyah,
I.e., a Nefesh in the World of Asiyah is born of the union of the above masculine and feminine middot (this union being called the yichud (or zivug) of זו״נ, which is an acronym for ז״א ונוקבא),
והמוחין שלהם, שהם בחינת חיה ונשמה דזו״נ
and of [the union of] their Mochin (i.e., ChaBaD, an acronym for the intellective soul-faculties of Chochmah, Binah and Daat, together constituting the Mochin of Za-and-nukva in the World of Asiyah), which are the Chayah and Neshamah of Za-and-nukva.
Foreshadowing the above-mentioned union at the level of the lower (emotive) Sefirot, the union which first brings a Nefesh to the stage of potential creation is that which takes place at the level of the higher (intellective) Sefirot. The two partners to this union are the soul-level called Chayah, representing the level of Chochmah16 (the masculine element), and the soul-level called Neshamah, representing the level of Binah17 (the feminine element).
Thus, even a soul that is merely of the level called Nefesh comprises all the Sefirot of the World of Asiyah — Chochmah, Binah, Za (the six emotive attributes), and nukva (Malchut).
שהן הן אחוריים דכלים דזו״נ דאצילות
These, in turn, are the external aspect of the kelim of Za-and-nukva of Atzilut.
For the kelim of Za-and-nukva of Atzilut illuminate and are infused within the Sefirot of the World of Asiyah.18 The Sefirot of Asiyah are thus the external aspect of the kelim of Za-and-nukva of Atzilut.
שהם אלקות ממש
And they (the kelim of Atzilut) are truly Divine,
שבתוכם מאיר אור אין סוף ברוך הוא, המלובש וגנוז בחכמה דאצילות
for in them radiates the [infinite] Ein Sof-light, which is vested and concealed in the Chochmah of Atzilut, for reasons explained in the Alter Rebbe’s Note to ch. 35; indeed, the infinite light vested in Chochmah illuminates all the kelim of the Sefirot of Atzilut:19 “The Supernal Father ‘nests’ in Atzilut,”
דאיהו וגרמוהי חד באצילות
and “He (the [infinite] Ein Sof-light) and His kelim are one in Atzilut.”
Since the Sefirot of Atzilut are the internal aspect of the Sefirot of Asiyah, the [infinite] Ein Sof-light is thus vested within the Sefirot of Asiyah.
ועל כן גם בנשמת האדם מאיר אור אין סוף ברוך הוא, מלובש וגנוז באור החכמה שבה, להחיות את האדם
Hence, since the soul derives from these Sefirot, it follows that the [infinite] Ein Sof-light radiates in the soul of man as well, vested and concealed in the light of its Chochmah, in order to animate man.
וממנה יוכל האדם להבין קצת בספירות העליונות
And from it (the soul), man is enabled to understand something of the Supernal Sefirot,
שכולן מאירות בנשמתו, הכלולה מהן
for they all radiate in his soul, which comprises them.
Since the soul derives from the Ten Sefirot and hence comprises ten corresponding faculties, man can arrive at an understanding of the Supernal Sefirot through contemplating the dynamics within his own soul.
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to make it perfectly clear that the Sefirot are, however, infinitely higher than the corresponding faculties within the soul. Indeed, even Abraham’s attribute of Chesed could in no way compare to the Chesed of the Sefirot, notwithstanding the fact that Abraham was considered a “chariot” to G d,20 i.e., a self-effacing vehicle with no direction or desire other than that of his Rider.
FOOTNOTES
1. Introduction II to Tikkunei Zohar, reproduced in Siddur Tehillat HaShem, pp. 125-6.
2. Part I, beginning of ch. 8.
3. Introduction to Tikkunei Zohar, p. 3b; Etz Chayim, Shaar 47, ch. 2 et al.; and see Epistle 20, below.
4. Yechezkel 1:26.
5. See Tanya, Part I, ch. 3.
6. P. 156b.
7. Discourse entitled Lo Tashbit.
8. Mishlei 1:6.
9. Kohelet 9:9.
10. Cf. Yeshayahu 12:5.
11. Iyov 19:26.
12. Berachot 10a.
13. Tehillim 103:1.
14. Quoted above — in Part I, beginning of ch. 2, and in Part III (Iggeret HaTeshuvah), ch. 4 — in the name of the Zohar.
15. Bereishit 2:7.
16. This connection is hinted at in the phrase, החכמה תחיה (Kohelet 7:12).
17. For this connection, cf. the phrase, נשמת שדי תבינם (Iyov 32:8).
18. See Etz Chayim, Shaar 47, ch. 2.
19. Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 6.
20. Note of the Rebbe: “Bereishit Rabbah 47:8, et al.; explained in Tanya, Part I, chs. 18, 23, et al.”
____________________________
Rambam:
• Daily Mitzvah P240 - Sefer Hamitzvos:
Tuesday, 14 Elul 5774 • 9 September 2014
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 240
Damage Caused by a Grazing Animal
"If a man shall cause his livestock to eat in a field..."—Exodus 22:4.
We are commanded regarding the laws [of liability] that apply if a person's animal causes financial loss by grazing [in another's field].
Damage Caused by a Grazing Animal
Positive Commandment 240
Translated by Berel Bell
The 240th mitzvah is that we are commanded to follow the laws regarding damage caused by grazing [hever].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "If a person allows his animal to graze in a field or a vineyard, [... he must pay for the damage]."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 2nd and 6th chapters of tractate Bava Kama and the 5th chapter of Gittin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid., 22:4.
Positive Commandment 240
Damage Caused by a Grazing Animal
"If a man shall cause his livestock to eat in a field..."—Exodus 22:4.
We are commanded regarding the laws [of liability] that apply if a person's animal causes financial loss by grazing [in another's field].
Damage Caused by a Grazing Animal
Positive Commandment 240
Translated by Berel Bell
The 240th mitzvah is that we are commanded to follow the laws regarding damage caused by grazing [hever].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "If a person allows his animal to graze in a field or a vineyard, [... he must pay for the damage]."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 2nd and 6th chapters of tractate Bava Kama and the 5th chapter of Gittin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid., 22:4.
________________________________________
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter a Day: To`en veNit`an - Chapter 12To`en veNit`an - Chapter 12
Halacha 1
The three years mentioned in the previous chapter must be from day to day. Even if one day was lacking, a claim of ownership is not established and the person in possession of the property is removed from it.
When does the above apply? With regard to landed property that produces benefit at all times - e.g., houses, courtyards, cisterns, pits, storage cavities, stores, inns, bathhouses, dovecotes, olive presses, fields that are continually irrigated and hence can be used for sowing and for planting, gardens, and orchards, and also servants who go on their own initiative, as we have explained.
Different rules apply with regard to a field that is watered only from rain and a grove of trees. The "threes years" are not calculated from day to day.
Instead, after the person in possession partakes of three harvests from one type of produce, it is considered as if three years have passed.
What is implied? There was a date grove and the person in possession harvested it three times, a grape orchard and he harvested it three times, or an olive grove and he harvested it three times, he is considered to have established a claim of ownership. This applies even if the trees were planted one after the other, and there was not enough space left between them. Although ultimately, they will dry and have to be uprooted, since the person derived benefit from them for three harvests, he has established a claim of ownership.
Halacha 2
If a person brings witnesses who testify that he dwelled in this courtyard for three years or rented it out to a tenant for three years, he establishes a claim of ownership.
If the owner of the courtyard claims: "Maybe you - or your tenant - did not dwell there during the day and during the night," his claim is valid. We tell the person in possession: "Bring witnesses that throughout these years, you dwelled there during the day and during the night, or depart."
Even when witnesses come and testify, saying: "The person in possession rented the field to us, and we dwelled there during the day and during the night," if the owner of the field demands: "Let them bring witnesses that they dwelled there during the day and during the night," these tenants must bring proof that they dwelled there at all times. The rationale is that the matter is dependent on them and is not dependent on the claim of the person in possession of the property that they should testify on his behalf.
Halacha 3
Different laws apply if the person in possession of the property or the witnesses were traveling salesmen who journey from village to village or the like. In such a situation, the court makes a claim on behalf of the owner at the outset. When he brings witnesses to try to substantiate his claim of ownership, the court tells him: "Bring witnesses who will testify that you manifested possession during the day and the night."
When does the above apply? With regard to courtyards, houses, and the like, in which people live during the day and the night. Different laws apply with regard to stores operated by merchants and the like, in which people dwell only during the day. In such a situation, if a person dwelled in the store for three years during the day, he establishes a claim of ownership.
Halacha 4
The three years mentioned must be consecutive, one following the other. If a person in possession of a field sowed it one year and left it fallow the next year, and then sowed it one year and left it fallow the next year, he does not establish a claim of ownership. This applies even if he followed this pattern for many years.
If the custom of the farmers of that area was to leave fields fallow, the person is considered to have established a claim of ownership. This applies even if some of the local farmers sow their fields year after year, and some sow their fields for one year and leave them fallow the next. For the person in possession may claim: "I left it fallow only so that it will produce more in the year that I sow it."
Halacha 5
When two partners maintained possession of a field for six years, one partaking of the produce in the first, third and fifth years, and the other partaking of the produce in the second, fourth and sixth years, neither is considered to have established a claim of ownership. The rationale is that the owner of the field can say: "Since I neither saw nor heard of one person maintaining possession year after year, I did not protest."
Accordingly, if these partners composed a legal document attesting to their partnership and stating that they should each utilize the field in successive years, if three years pass in which they use it, they establish a claim of ownership. The rationale is that a legal document becomes public knowledge. Hence, if the owner did not protest, he forfeited his right.
Similar laws apply if two people maintain possession of a servant and use his services year after year. Ordinarily, they do not establish a claim of ownership. If they compose a legal document concerning the servant, they do.
Halacha 6
The following rules apply when a person who took possession of a property derived benefit from its produce for one year and then sold it, the purchaser derived benefit from its produce for one year and then sold it, and the second purchaser derived benefit from its produce for a year. If they sold it to each other with a deed of sale, the activities of the three are combined and a claim of ownership is established, because the previous owner did not protest.
If they did not record the transaction in a deed of sale, a claim of ownership is not established, because the original owners can say: "Since one person did not maintain a presence within it for three years, there was no necessity to issue a protest."
Halacha 7
When a father derived benefit from a property for one year, and his son derived benefit for two years, or the father derived benefit for two years, and his son derived benefit for one year, a claim of ownership is established.
The same law applies if the father derived benefit for a year, the son derived benefit for a year, and the person who purchased it derived benefit for a year, provided that he purchased it with a deed of sale.
Halacha 8
When a person seeking to establish a claim of ownership partakes of produce from a field for one year in the presence of the father who was the owner, and two years in the presence of his son, or two years in the presence of the father and one year in the presence of the son, a claim of ownership is established.
Similarly, a claim of ownership is established when the person in possession of the field partakes of its produce for one year in the presence of the father, one year in the presence of the son, and one year in the presence of a person who purchased the field from the son. This law applies when the son sold the field together with all his fields. In such an instance, the person in possession of the field will not appreciate that it was sold, and hence will not necessarily be careful to maintain possession of his deed of acquisition beyond the three-year period. If, however, the son sold the field as a discrete entity the property is expropriated and given to the purchaser. For there can be no greater protest against the squatter's possession than this.
Halacha 9
If the person in possession left the field fallow year after year - even for many years - since he did not derive any benefit from it, he does not establish a claim of ownership.
Similarly, if he irrigated it or even irrigated it and did no more than break up large clumps of earth, since he did not benefit from its produce, he does not establish a claim of ownership.
Halacha 10
If the person in possession sowed it, but did not make any profit - i.e., he sowed a kor and reaped a kor - he does not establish a claim of ownership, since he did not derive any benefit from it.
Halacha 11
If he harvests the field as straw, he does not establish a claim of ownership. If in that region it was common to sow to harvest straw because straw is very expensive, he does establish a claim of ownership.
Halacha 12
If the person in possession partook of produce of a field that was orlah, grew during the Sabbatical year, or contained mixed species, he establishes a claim of ownership despite the fact that he derived benefit through transgression.
Halacha 13
If the property in question was a stone or a rocky area unfit to be sown, the person in possession must benefit from the land in an appropriate manner - e.g., use it to spread out fruits to dry, as a place for an animal to pasture, or the like. If he does not derive benefit throughout all these three years in an appropriate manner, he does not establish a claim of ownership.
Halacha 14
The following rules apply when a person would tie his animal in a specific place in a courtyard belonging to a colleague, he would raise chickens there, he would place an oven, a range or a mill there, or he would place his fertilizer there. Whether or not he erects a barrier there, if he uses the property for these purposes during the day and the night and claims that the owner of the courtyard sold or gave him that place, he establishes a claim of ownership.
Halacha 15
The following rules apply when a field is surrounded by a fence and a person took possession of it and sowed crops outside the fence, deriving benefit from the portion that is not protected. Even though he derives benefit year after year, he does not establish a claim of ownership. The rationale is that the owner can claim: "Since we saw that he was sowing crops in a place that was unprotected, we said: 'Whatever he sowed, the beasts of the field will eat. Therefore, we did not protest.'" This law also applies to anyone who sows crops in a place that is not protected and the crops are accessible to animals and other people.
Halacha 16
When the person in possession derives benefit from the entire property with the exception of one portion fit to sow a quarter of a kav of grain, he establishes a claim of ownership over the entire field, with the exception of the portion from which he did not benefit. Even if that was a rocky portion in the midst of the field, since he did not use it in a way appropriate for it, he does not establish a claim of ownership over it.
Halacha 17
The following rules apply when one person took possession of trees and derived benefit from their produce, and another took possession of the land, sowed crops there, and derived benefit from them, and each of them claims that the entire property belongs to him, because he purchased it from the owner. The person in possession of the trees is given the trees and the land necessary to tend to them - i.e., the space in which a person picking fruit can stand together with his basket for each tree. The person in possession of the land receives the remainder of the land.
Halacha 18
Similarly, when a person benefits from all the produce of a tree for three years and then issues a claim against the owner of the tree: "You sold me this tree and its land," he is granted an amount of land equivalent to the thickness of the tree until the depths of the earth.
Halacha 19
The following laws apply when there are 30 trees within a tree grove large enough to sow three se'ah of grain. If a person in possession benefited from ten trees in the first year, ten in the second year, and ten in the third, he establishes his possession over the entire grove.
The above applies when the ten trees from which he benefited were spread through the entire area of the field, and the other trees did not produce any fruit. If, however, the other trees produced fruit and he did not partake of it, he establishes a claim of ownership only on the produce from which he partook.
Halacha 20
When does the above apply? When he benefited from some of the fruit and the people reaped the remainder of the fruit. If, however, he left the fruit on the trees and benefited from the fruit from several portions throughout the entire grove, he establishes a claim of ownership concerning the entire field, even though he did not collect all its produce.
____________________________
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters a Day: Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Three, Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Four, Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Five
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Three
1. It is taken for granted that an animal is prone to eat fruit, vegetables or the like. Therefore, if [an animal] enters a domain belonging to another person and eats produce that it would normally eat, [the owner of the animal] is liable for the entire amount of the damages, as stated [in Exodus 22:4]: "And if he shall send forth his animals, and they shall pasture in another's field, payment should be exacted from his choice field."
If [the animal] ate produce belonging to another person in the public domain, [the owner] is not liable.1 If [the animal] benefits [from eating the produce], the owner must pay for the benefit [his animal received], but not for the damages caused.
2. What is implied? If [an animal] entered another person's domain and ate sesame seeds, chestnuts or the like that were worth a dinar, [the owner] must pay a dinar. If [the animal ate these foods] in the public domain and derived benefit, we consider [these foods] as if they were barley or fodder, and [the owner is required to] pay the wholesale2 price of fodder3 or barley.4
3. If the animal ate foods that are harmful to it - e.g., it ate wheat - since it did not derive any benefit, [the owner] is not liable. If it ate substances that it would not usually eat - e.g., it ate a garment or a utensil - [the owner] should pay half the damages.5
[This applies] both in a private domain and in a public domain. [The rationale is that] this is a deviation. [Hence, the owner is liable for only half the damages. He is liable for damage caused in the public domain, however] because it is the ordinary practice of people to leave their utensils or garments in the public domain while they rest.
4. There is a doubt [regarding the liability of the owner when his] animal is standing in a private domain, but takes produce [belonging to the owner of the private domain] from the public domain and eats it in that private domain.6 Therefore, [the owner] is liable only for the benefit [his animal] derived.7 If, however, the person whose property was damaged seizes possession of the full worth of the damage [caused by the animal], it should not be expropriated from him,8 for [the produce] was eaten in his domain.
5. When a dog entered a courtyard, took bread or meat, brought it into the public domain or to another courtyard9 and ate it there, [the owner] should pay for the benefit [the dog] received.10
If [the dog] ate [the food] in a field belonging to the owner of the courtyard, the [dog's owner] must pay the full extent of the damages as if it had been eaten in the courtyard, because it was eaten in a domain belonging to the person whose property was damaged.11 The same [laws] apply in all analogous situations.
6. [The following rules apply when] an animal eats foods that it would not ordinarily eat, but would eat under constraint: e.g., a cow that ate barley, a donkey that ate vetch12 or fish, a pig that ate a piece of meat, a dog that licked oil, a cat that ate dates and the like.
If the foods were eaten in a domain belonging to the person whose property was damaged, [the owner] must pay the entire amount of the damage.13 [If the foods were eaten] in the public domain, he is not liable. If [the animal] benefited, the owner must pay for that benefit.
7. When a beast enters a private domain and seizes an animal or meat14 and eats it, [its owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, for this is its ordinary course of behavior.
When, however, a dog eats small sheep,15 or a cat eats large cocks,16 this is considered to be a deviation,17 and [the owner] is liable for [only] half the damages.
8. When there is a basket of bread [in a private domain], and a donkey enters and breaks the basket and eats the bread, [the owner] is liable for the full extent of the damages, for this is [a donkey's] ordinary behavior.
Similarly, if a goat sees a turnip or the like on the opening of a jug, stumbles over the jug and eats the turnip and breaks the jug, [the owner] must pay the full damages for both, for it is the ordinary pattern [for such an animal] to hang on to utensils and climb on them in order to eat. The same applies in all analogous situations.
If, however, a donkey came in and ate bread and then broke a basket, [the owner] is liable for full damages for the bread, but only half damages for the basket.18 The same applies in all analogous situations.
9. When an animal eats [produce] in the marketplace, whether when walking or when standing, [its owner] must pay [only] for the benefit it received.19 This applies even if the animal turns [its head] to the corners of the marketplace and eats.20 If, however, the animal left the marketplace and went and stood at the corner of the marketplace and ate [produce], [its owner] must pay for the damages.21
If the animal ate from [produce in] the storefront, [the owner] must pay [only] for the benefit it received. If it ate from [produce] within the store, he must pay the full extent of the damages.
10. If an animal was walking in the public domain and stretched out its neck and ate from [produce] that was [loaded onto] another animal's back, [its owner] must pay [only] for the benefit it received, for it is common for animals to eat from [a load] being carried by another.22 [This law applies] even when [the animal] stands.
If it jumped23 to eat from the [produce] that was [loaded onto] another animal's back, [its owner] must pay the full extent of the damages,24 because the back of another animal is considered to be the private domain of the person who suffered the damage.
11. When an animal slips on a stone or on urine and falls onto fruit or vegetables or eats them, [the owner] is required to pay [only] for the benefit it receives. Even if it walks from one row to another row, and even if it stays there the entire day, he is required to pay [only] for the benefit it receives.25
What benefit could it receive from falling? That it fell on a soft place and did not crush its limbs.
If, by contrast, an animal descended [into private property] in an ordinary manner and ate produce, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages. Even if it soiled produce with its afterbirth, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, because the first stage involved negligence.26
Similarly, if it was pushed by another animal and fell, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, because he should have had them pass one by one so that they would not push each other.27
12. If it slipped and fell [into another person's garden], departed28 and then returned to that garden, [the owner] must pay the full extent of the damages, even if it returned without his knowledge. He was obligated to watch it, [and prevent it] from returning.29 For it is known that if an animal knows the way to a garden, it will return on its own initiative.
13. When a potter brings his wares into a person's courtyard without his permission, and an animal belonging to the owner [of the courtyard] broke the pottery, [the owner] is not liable.30 [Moreover,] if the animal is injured, the potter is liable.31
If he brought his wares in with [the owner's] permission, [the potter is not liable [for the animal's injury].32 If the owner made a commitment to guard the pottery, he is liable [for the damages].
14. Similarly, if [a person] brought produce into a courtyard belonging to another individual without his permission and the animal belonging to the owner [of the courtyard] ate it, [the owner of the courtyard] is not liable.33 If the animal slipped on it and suffered injuries, the owner of the produce is liable.34 If he brought the produce in with [the owner's] permission, [the owner of the produce] is not liable [for the animal's injury].35 If the owner [of the courtyard] made a commitment to guard the produce, he is liable [for the damages to the produce].36
If the person brought produce [into a courtyard] without permission, and an animal belonging to the owner of the courtyard ate it and suffered injury because it ate it, the owner of the produce is not liable. The animal should not have eaten it.37
When the owner of a courtyard allowed a person to bring his produce into [the courtyard] and left [the owner of the produce] to watch it, if an animal belonging to the owner of the courtyard ate from the produce and suffered damages, the owner of the produce is liable. Since he saw the animal eating produce that could damage it and took no action, he is liable. For the owner of the courtyard is not present to banish his animal from them.
An incident occurred when a woman entered to bake in the house of her neighbors.38 They left her alone, so that they would not see her while she was kneading and baking.39 A goat belonging to the owner came and ate from [her raw] dough and died. The Sages obligated her to reimburse [the owners] for the goat. These principles apply in all similar situations.
15. When a person made a grain heap in a field belonging to a colleague without the latter's permission, and an animal belonging to the owner of the field ate it, [the owner of the field] is not liable. If the animal slipped on it and suffered injuries, the owner of the produce is liable. If the animal ate it and suffered injury because it ate it, [the owner of the produce] is not liable.40
If he had permission to make the grain heap, the owner of the field is liable, even if he did not accept the responsibility to guard [the grain pile]. Once a watchman in the granaries says: "Make your grain heap here," it is as if he told him: "Make your grain heap and I will guard it for you."41
FOOTNOTES
1.The proof-text stated above explicitly states that the owner is liable when his animals pasture in another's field. This is understood as excluding the public domain.In Chapter 1, Halachah 8, the Rambam explains the rationale for this exclusion: It is the habit of an animal to go and eat as it proceeds - i.e., if a person leaves produce in the public domain, he should take it for granted that it will be eaten by the animals passing through.
2.Our translation is loose. The Hebrew b'zol literally means as they are cheap. Rashi (Bava Kama 20a) states that he should pay 2/3 of the market price of the fodder. The reason for this reduction is that the owner is being forced to pay against his will.Based on his interpretation of the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Bava Kama 2:2), the Shiltei Gibborim interpret b'zol as meaning when they are cheap - i.e., if they cost less than the substance eaten by the animal.
3.Here also we have used a loose translation, because as mentioned in the Maggid Mishneh, the Kessef Mishneh and the Lechem Mishneh, there are several different interpretations of the Hebrew term emir.
4.I.e., although the chestnuts or the sesame seeds are more valuable than the simple fodder, the owner is required to pay only the market price for the fodder, for that is what he would have fed his animal.
5.The commentaries explain that this damage is considered a derivative of goring.
6.There are two dimensions to the damage: the place from which the produce was taken, and the place where it was destroyed. One is not liable for produce taken from the public domain, but one is liable for produce eaten in a private domain. Hence the doubt mentioned by the Rambam. See Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 391:12.
7.Because of the doubt, money cannot be exacted from its owner.
8.Since the money is now in possession of the person whose property was damaged, it can also not be exacted from him. See the notes to Chapter 1, Halachah 11.
9.Belonging to another person.
10.I.e., he does not pay the full price of the food. The rationale is, as in the previous halachah, that the food was eaten in the public domain.
11.The fact that it was taken away from the place from which it was originally taken is not significant, provided that it is eaten in a domain belonging to that owner.
12.A type of bean usually eaten by cows.
13.Despite the fact that this is not the animal's ordinary food, since it ate it, the owner is liable for the damages. If, however, an animal eats food that it would never eat - e.g., a cow ate meat - the owner must pay only half the damages Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 391:3).
14.The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 391:6) interpret this as referring to raw meat alone.
15.I.e., even small sheep; certainly this applies with regard to large sheep.
16.Eating small cocks, however, is not considered a deviation. See Ketubot 41b.
17.The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) clarifies that this refers only to living animals. Once an animal has died, however, it is natural for a dog or cat to eat from its corpse regardless of its size.
18.This is considered a derivative of goring. Hence the payment must be exacted from the body of the animal that caused the damage Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 391:4).
19.For the marketplace is considered to be part of the public domain.
20.For this is also the ordinary practice of an animal in the public domain.
21.The area on the side of the marketplace is considered to be a private domain, and considered like the private property of the person whose property was damaged (Tosafot, Bava Kama 21a).
22.Therefore, it is considered to be an ordinary instance of an animal's eating produce in the public domain.
23.And placed its forelegs on the other animal. By doing so, it is considered to have left the public domain and entered the domain of the person whose produce was damaged.
24.The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 391:11) differ and maintain that this ruling applies only when it is impossible for the animal to eat the produce without jumping on the other animal.
25.Since the animal entered the private domain by accident, its owner is not held responsible for the damage it caused.
26.Even if the owner did not know that the animal was about to give birth, and thus the damage can be considered to have come about by forces beyond his control. Since the animal's entry into the private domain came as a result of negligence, the owner is held liable. See Chapter 2, Halachah 15.
27.I.e., this is also considered negligence on the owner's part. The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 394:1) consider this to be accidental, and free the owner of responsibility.
28.The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 394:2) state that this law applies when the owner is aware that the animal entered the garden and departed.
29.The Maggid Mishneh, the Tur and the Ramah (ibid.) state that if the owner locked the animal in a stall in an ordinary manner, and the animal managed to escape and return to the garden, the owner is not liable, because he did everything necessary to prevent this from happening.
30.His animal has free rein within his own courtyard; it can be assumed that it will walk freely and trod on anything placed there. The potter brought his wares there at his own risk.
31.The pottery is considered to be a pit dug in someone's private property, because the potter should have taken the necessary precautions to ensure that the owner's animal would not be damaged.
32.For the owner knew of the pottery and should have taken care that his animal not be damaged.
33.For it can be assumed that his animal will eat any produce left in his courtyard.
34.For he created an obstacle in another person's domain.
35.Since the owner gave the person permission to place his produce there, he must take responsibility for his animal.
36.Note the Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 393:1, 398:5), who maintain that if the owner of the courtyard gave the person permission to bring his wares in, he becomes liable for them. He does not have to make an explicit statement accepting responsibility.
37.I.e., the owner of the courtyard should take responsibility for making sure that his animal does not overeat (Sefer Me'irat Einayim 393:4).
38.Sefer Me'irat Einayim 393:5 explains that this incident teaches that even when the owner of the produce does not know that the owner of the courtyard has left, under certain circumstances, he should take responsibility for the animal belonging to the owner of the courtyard.
39.It is common for a woman to roll up her sleeves and bare her arms when she is kneading dough. Out of concern for modesty, the owners of the house left the room (Bava Kama 48a).
40.These laws are basically a restatement of those of the previous halachah. The new insight stated by the Rambam comes in the following paragraph.
41.Note the Lechem Mishneh and the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Bava Kama 6:3), which indicate that the watchman is liable and not the owner of the field.See, however, Sefer Me'irat Einayim 393:7, which states that this is speaking about an instance in which the owner himself guards his fields.
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Four
1. When a person gathers sheep in a corral and locks them in with a gate that can withstand an ordinary wind, and [yet the sheep were able to] leave and cause damage, the owner is not liable.1 If [the gate] cannot withstand an ordinary wind or if the walls of the corral are shaky, [the owner] is not considered to have enclosed [the sheep] in a proper manner. [Thus, if they are able to] leave and cause damage, he is liable.2
Even if [the sheep] dug beneath [the gate3 to] get out, [the gate] was broken at night,4 or thieves broke it down, the owner of the sheep is liable [for the damage his sheep cause].5
If, however, the gate was strong and it was broken at night or thieves broke in, and then [the sheep] departed and caused damage, [the owner] is not liable.6 If the thieves took the sheep out and then they caused damage, the thieves are liable.
2. [The following rules apply when] a person breaks down a fence in front of an animal belonging to a colleague. If the fence was strong and sturdy, he is liable.7 If the wall was shaky, he cannot be held liable according to mortal law,8 but he has a moral obligation.
Similarly, if a person places poison in front of an animal belonging to a colleague, he cannot be held liable according to mortal law,9 but he has a moral obligation.10
3. When a person brings an animal belonging to a colleague to crops belonging to a third individual, the person who brought the animal there is liable.11
Similarly, if a colleague hit an animal with a switch until it walked to crops belonging to a third individual, the person who switched it is liable.
4. When a person entrusts his animal to an unpaid watchman, a paid watchman, a renter or a borrower, these individuals assume the owner's responsibilities. If [the animal] causes damages, the watchman is held liable.
When does the above apply? When he did not guard the animal at all. If, however, he guarded the animal in an excellent manner, as he should,12 and it got loose and caused damage, the watchman is not liable, and the owners are liable, even if the animal kills a human being.13
Should the watchman guard the animal in an inferior manner,14 he is not held liable if he is an unpaid watchman.15 If he is a paid watchman, a renter or a borrower, he is held liable.16
5. If [a person] leaves an animal in the sun and it gets loose and causes damage, even if it must dig [under the fence to do so], the one who left it in the sun is liable. [The rationale is that because of] the discomfort [the animal] feels, it will do anything it possibly can to flee.17
6. When [a person] gives his animal to a deaf mute, a mentally incompetent individual or a minor18 to watch, the owner is liable. [This applies] even if the ox is tied, for an ox - and similarly other [animals] - will break open the knot and go out and cause damage.19
Even if the animal was guarded in an excellent manner, and it dug [under the fence] and escaped and caused damage, the owners are liable.20
7. [The following rules apply when] a person entrusts his ox to five men, one of them was negligent, and the ox escaped and caused damage. If all five are required to guard the ox, the person who was negligent is liable.21 If the ox can still be watched by the others, they share in the liability.22
8. [The following rules apply if a person] borrowed an ox under the presumption that it was an ordinary ox, and it was discovered that it had already been classified as one that gores. If the borrower knew that it had a tendency to gore,23 the owners are required to pay half the damages, for wherever the ox goes, it remains the owner's property.24 The borrower is also required to pay half the damages, because even if it had been an ordinary ox, as he had thought, he would have been required to pay half the damages, for he knew that the ox had a tendency to gore.25
If, however, the borrower did not know of this tendency, he is not liable at all,26 and the owners must pay the entire amount of the damages.
9. When a borrower borrows an ox that is classified as an ordinary ox, and it becomes classified as a goring ox when in the possession of the borrower, it is removed from that category when it is returned to its owner. Since the domain [under which the animal is] changes, its classification also changes. [If the ox gores,] the owners must pay half the damages, and the borrower is not held liable at all, for he returned it to its owners.
10. When a watchman accepts responsibility only for watching the body of an animal [entrusted to him], but [does not accept responsibility] for the damage it causes, if [the animal] causes damage the watchman is not held liable, and its owners are.27
If [the watchman] accepted responsibility [only] for the damages [the animal] causes, he is liable if it causes damage. If it is injured, the watchman is not liable, and the owners should sue the person who caused the injury.
11. When a watchman entrusts [an animal] to another watchman, [and it causes damage], the first watchman is liable to pay the person whose property was damaged. For whenever one watchman delegates [an entrusted object] to another watchman, he is liable.28 For the person whose property was damaged will tell him: "Why didn't you watch it yourself instead of delegating it to someone else? Pay me yourself, and sue the watchman to whom you delegated it."
If, however, the watchman entrusted [the animal] to his son, a member of his household or one of his helpers, they assume the responsibility that was the watchman's, and they are liable.29
12. [The following rule applies when] a watchman is liable to pay [for the damages an animal caused], but he is insolvent. If the animal that caused the damage is considered to be an ordinary animal, in which case half the damages must be paid from the body of the animal itself, the person whose property was damaged should take his due from the animal, and the sum that he collects should be considered to be a debt owed by the watchman to the owner of the animal.30
13. Whenever an animal causes damage to crops that are growing, the damage is assessed by comparison with a field sixty times the size of the crops that were damaged. The one who is liable - either the owner or the watchman - is obligated to pay that sum.31
What is implied? If [an animal] ate the amount of produce that would grow when a se'ah [of seeds] were sown in that field, we calculate the worth of an area in which sixty se'ah [of seeds] could be sown in that field, [evaluating] how much it would be worth [before the animal ate from it] and how much it is worth now. [The owner or the watchman] is liable for the remainder.
Similarly, if the animal ate an amount of produce that would grow when a kav or a quarter of a kav were sown - [or even if it ate] one stalk of grain - the damages are assessed by comparison with a field sixty times the size of the crops that were damaged.
14. When, [by contrast,] an animal ate fruit that ripened and no longer needed [the nurture of] the land, [the owner of the animal is required to] pay the full value of ripe produce. If [the animal ate] a se'ah, he must pay for a se'ah. If [it ate] two se'ah, he must pay for two se'ah.
[The following laws apply if an animal] ate the fruit of one date palm, or a person gathered the fruit of a colleague's date palm and ate it. If it was a Roman date palm, whose fruit is not of very high quality, it should be measured in comparison with a orchard of date palms sixty times the size of its land. If it was a Persian date palm or the like, whose fruit is of very high quality, the date palm should be evaluated individually. An assessment should be made of its worth before the fruit was eaten and its worth after the fruit was eaten.
FOOTNOTES
1.For he has done all that could be expected of him to watch his sheep.
2.For he is considered to be negligent.
3.If, however, they dug under another part of the corral, the owner is not liable, for their exit has nothing to do with his negligence (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 396:1).
4.If the walls were broken during the day, and the owner did not fix them, he is considered to be negligent.
5.Although the damage is considered to have been caused by forces beyond the owner's control, since this damage was preceded by acts of negligence on the part of the owner, he is liable. See Chapter 2, Halachah 15.
6.The damage is considered to have been caused by forces beyond the owner's control. Even if the owner is informed that the gate to his corral was broken at night, he is not obligated to fix it until the following day (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:2).
7.The Ra'avad and the Tur maintain that the person who broke the fence is not liable unless he leads the animal out. The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 396:3), while the Ramah cites the other views.See the Maggid Mishneh, who questions the difference between this law and the previous one, which states that thieves are not liable unless they actually take the animal out of the corral.
8.Since the owner is considered negligent in leaving the fence shaky, he is held liable for the damage the animal caused. Needless to say, the person who broke the wall down is liable for the damage to the wall, even though it was shaky.
9.He is considered to have been merely an indirect cause (grama).
10.See Chapter 2, Halachah 19.
11.He is considered to be a direct cause of the damage.
12.I.e., enclosing it behind a gate capable of withstanding winds of unusual force.
13.The wording of this halachah has raised questions for there is an obvious difficulty: If the watchmen guarded the animal in an excellent manner, why is the owner liable? The Maggid Mishneh explains that the liability refers only to damage caused by the animal by goring. (See Chapter 7, Halachah 1.) The Kessef Mishneh refers to a responsum purported to have been sent by the Rambam to the Sages of Lunil, which states that there was a printing error and the text should read: If, however, they guarded the animal in an excellent manner, as they should, and it got loose and caused damage, the watchman is not liable. If the watchman guarded the animal in an inferior manner, he is not held liable if he is an unpaid watchman. Instead, the owners are liable, even if the animal kills a human being. The watchman is held liable if he is a paid watchman, a renter or a borrower.In his Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 396:8), Rav Yosef Karo quotes the interpretation of the Maggid Mishneh. The Sefer Me'irat Einayim 396:18 questions this, referring to Karo's Kessef Mishneh.
14.Enclosing it behind a gate capable of withstanding ordinary winds.
15.For an unpaid watchman is not expected to take as thorough care of an animal as a paid watchman. See, however, note 13.
16.Such watchmen are expected to watch the animal in a thorough manner.
17.The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 396:5) state that even if the person tied the animal with a strong rope, he is liable if it breaks loose in these circumstances.
18.All of these three types of people are considered mentally incompetent. They are not responsible for their actions, and the owner is considered negligent for charging them with watching his animal.
19.The owner is considered negligent because these individuals will frequently play with the rope, and by doing so loosen the knot, enabling the animal to break free.
20.Although escaping in this manner is considered to be a factor beyond the owner's control, since he was originally negligent in entrusting the animal to a mentally incompetent person, he must bear the consequences.The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling. It is, however, accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 396:6).
21.For the damage is due to his negligence.
22.For had they not been negligent as well, the ox would not have escaped. Although the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 396:7) appears to favor the Rambam's ruling, it also quotes the opinion of the Tur, which states that the person who is negligent shares the liability only when the others tell him that because of his negligence, they are withdrawing their responsibility. Otherwise, it is they who are liable, and not he.
23.But did not know that it had been placed in the category of a goring ox.
24.I.e., when an animal is sold, its status is changed with the change in ownership. (See Chapter 6, Halachah 6.) This, however, does not apply when it is merely borrowed (Kessef Mishneh).
25.The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, explaining that it applies only when the court takes possession of the ox.
26.For it is more difficult to guard an ox that has a tendency to gore, and the borrower did not accept this responsibility.
27.The Rambam's statements imply that if the watchman makes no specific statement with regard to whether or not he is responsible for the damages the animal causes, he is liable for the damage it causes (Maggid Mishneh). The Ra'avad understands the Rambam as making such an implication, and he objects, maintaining that the watchman should not be held liable. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 396:8) follows the Maggid Mishneh's conception. They maintain that the principle followed by the Rambam should be accepted with the exception of a goring ox.
28.The first watchman is considered negligent in entrusting it to a second watchman (even if an unpaid watchman entrusts it to a paid watchman). Therefore, the first watchman is liable, even in an instance when the object was destroyed by forces beyond the second watchman's control.
29.The rationale is that a watchman will frequently delegate an entrusted article to these individuals. The owner should have taken this into account when he entrusted the article to the watchman at the outset.
30.If the animal was already classified as prone to cause damages, this law would not apply, because the obligation would rest solely on the watchman's person. When, however, the animal is not placed in that category, since its own body is on lien for the damages, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 7, it is expropriated in lieu of payment.
31.Since the produce was growing, it would be unfair for the person whose animal caused the damages to be required to pay for it as if it were harvested fruit that was damaged. Instead, one considers the damaged crops as a part in a larger whole, thus reducing the amount of the damages. A compromise is accepted that takes in consideration the positions of both the owner of the land and the owner of the animal.The produce is not evaluated individually, for this would inflate the amount of damages paid. Nor is its share evaluated in comparison with the entire field, for then the amount of damages would be unfairly low. Instead, it is evaluated when compared with an area sixty times its size as explained.A se'ah is six kabbin. A kab is 1.376 kilograms according to Shiurei Torah. Thus a se'ah is 8.256 kilograms. The area where a se'ah of seeds would be sown is 50 cubits by 50 cubits.
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Five
1. [The following laws apply when] an animal was pasturing and entered fields and vineyards [belonging to others]. Even though it did not cause any damage,1 a warning should be given to its owner on three occasions.2 [Afterwards,] if he does not watch his animal and prevent it from pasturing [in other people's fields], the owner of the field has the right to slaughter the animal in a ritually acceptable manner,3 and tell its owners: "Come and sell your meat." [The rationale is that] it is forbidden for a person to cause damages and then to pay for the damages he caused. Even being an [indirect] cause of damage is forbidden.
2. For this reason, our Sages forbade [our people] from raising small animals4 and small beasts5 in Eretz Yisrael, where there are fields and vineyards.6 One may, however, raise these animals in the forests and deserts of Eretz Yisrael.7In Syria,8 it is permitted to raise these animals everywhere.
3. Joshua and his court established ten conditions at the time they divided the land [into ancestral plots]:
a) One may pasture a small animal in forests that are thick with trees;9 one may not, however, pasture a large animal there.10 In a forest that is not thick with trees, one may not pasture either a large animal or a small animal without the permission of the owners.
b) Any person is permitted to collect wood from a field belonging to a colleague. This refers to wood that is not valuable - comparable to thorns, brambles and prickly shrubs. Moreover, this refers to fresh twigs that are still connected to their source of nurture,11 and applies only when the person will not uproot them entirely.12 It is forbidden to take other types of wood.
c) Any person may collect grass that is growing on its own accord anywhere,13 except for a field of fenugrec that was sown to be used as animal fodder.14
d) A person may cut off a branch from any tree in any place,15 except from the branches left in an old olive tree.16 One may not, however, cut off closer than the length of an egg from the place where the branches begin to spread from an olive tree. And one may cut only from the place where a shoot is joined to the trunk of a reed or a vine. With regard to other trees, one may cut from the center of the tree and not from its higher branches.
[Although] permission was granted to cut off a branch, this applies only to [cutting] from a new branch17 that does not yet produce fruit, but not from an old branch that produces fruit. One may cut off [a branch] only from a portion of the tree that is not exposed to the sun.18
e) When a new spring of water emerges, the inhabitants of the city in whose territory it emerges may make use of it,19 even though its source is elsewhere. No others may take water from it together with them.
f) Any person may catch fish in Lake Kinneret, provided he fishes with a small net. Only the tribe20 to which the lake was awarded as part of their ancestral portion may spread out large nets that will prevent the passage of other boats.21
g) Any person who needs to relieve himself may turn off the path, go behind any fence he sees and defecate there. [This applies] even with regard to a field of saffron.22 One may pick up a stone from there and clean oneself with it.
h) Any person who loses his way in a vineyard or the like may break through the vines and ascend, or break through the vines and descend until he is able to find his way.
i) When the public thoroughfare is filled with mud, or the ravines are filled with water, passersby may take side paths, even though they are private property.
j) A corpse that has no one to bury it23 acquires its place and should be buried there by the person who finds it. This applies provided the corpse is not lying lengthwise across the path,24 or within the Sabbath boundaries of a city. In those instances, the corpse should be transported to a cemetery.25
4. King Solomon ordained that passersby are permitted to walk on private paths in the fields during the summer months until the second phase of fall rains descend.26
5. These rules apply in all places, even in the diaspora.27
6. From the time dew descends in Babylonia, it is forbidden to walk through private pathways belonging to others.28
7. Although it is forbidden to raise a small animal in Eretz Yisrael, one may maintain possession of one for 30 days prior to a pilgrimage festival,29 or prior to the wedding of one's son.30
A butcher may buy an animal for slaughter and may leave it for a certain time until he slaughters it, as long as it does not pasture with the flock. Instead, whoever maintains possession of a small animal must keep it within his house, so that it does not cause damage.
8. [Our Sages] established an equation between Babylonia and Israel, prohibiting the raising of small animals and beasts there as well. For [in Talmudic times,] the majority of the fields and vineyards there belonged to Jews.31
9. Similarly, our Sages forbade raising pigs in all places.32 Also, [our Sages forbade raising] dogs unless they are tied by a chain. One may, however, raise dogs in a city near the border.33 During the day [the dogs] should be chained, and at night let loose.
Our Sages said:34 "Cursed be one who raises dogs and pigs, because they frequently cause a great degree of damage."
10. When a shepherd repents, he should not be obligated to sell [his entire herd] immediately. Instead, he should sell a bit at a time.35 Similarly, if a person has inherited dogs and pigs, he is not required to sell all of them immediately, but instead may sell them bit by bit.
FOOTNOTES
1.The Ra'avad and Rabbenu Asher take issue with the Rambam on this point, explaining that the owner of the field generally does not have the right to slaughter an animal belonging to another person. Bava Kama 23b does speak of the owner of a field slaughtering goats belonging to someone else, but this was a special instance. He knew that the goats were being taken to the market to be slaughtered.The Maggid Mishneh explains that the Rambam had a different interpretation of that passage. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 397:1-2) follows the Ra'avad's interpretation.
2.The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (op. cit.) interpret this to be implying that if the owner of the animal says, Why come to me with a complaint? Let the owner of the field build a strong fence around his field to prevent animals from entering, his claim is not accepted. He is required to take responsibility for his animal.
3.This minimizes to the greatest degree possible the loss that the owner of the animal would suffer.
4.E.g., sheep and goats.
5.E.g., deer.
6.For they will harm the produce. The Maggid Mishneh explains that this law (and those that follow) were instituted as part of the provisions of yishuv Eretz Yisrael, the settlement of our Holy Land. (See also Hilchot Edut 10:4, which states that a shepherd of sheep or goats is not acceptable as a witness, because it is likely that he will pasture his flocks in fields belonging to others. See also Hilchot Bechorot 3:6.)It is, however, permissible to raise large animals like cows in Eretz Yisrael.
7.Where the damage is not significant.
8.See Hilchot Terumot 1:4,9, which defines the status of Syria as less than that of Eretz Yisrael, but greater than that of the diaspora as a whole.
9.I.e., the owner of the forest has no right to protest.
10.For it could damage the forest.
11.If they are dry and severed from the ground, they are fit to serve as firewood for the owners of the field.
12.Significantly, the Tur (Choshen Mishpat 274) does not mention this dimension.
13.This is beneficial for the owner of the field, because the grass detracts from the field's growth potential.
14.For grass and fenugrec make excellent fodder. For that reason, if the fenugrec is being grown for human consumption, one may pick the grass. Bava Kama 81a states that if the fenugrec is growing in rows, one may assume that it has been planted for human consumption.
15.This is allowed to enhance the settlement of Eretz Yisrael, for it will enable more trees to be grown there.
16.When an olive tree has become old, and it no longer produces a significant amount of fruit, all of its branches are cut off except two, so that its growth potential will become concentrated. Cutting off one of these remaining branches would damage the future of the tree.
17.One that is less than a year old.
18.For it is the branches that are exposed to the sun that provide a tree with its nurture.
19.Without payment.
20.I.e., the tribe of Naftali.
21.The Tur (loc. cit.) and others differ with the Rambam and maintain that even the owner of a lake may not fish with nets large enough to prevent the passage of a boat.Others interpret large nets as referring to nets that will catch large quantities of fish. Fishing privileges of that nature are not granted to another tribe.
22.A type of spice that will be damaged by the unpleasant odor of feces.
23.We have used a loose translation. The Hebrew term meit mitzvah, literally a corpse that we are commanded to bury, refers to a Jewish corpse lying on the road, that has no one to bury it (Hilchot Eivel 3:8).
24.Our translation is taken from Rashi's commentary on Bava Kama 81b. In these instances, the presence of a grave will be likely to impart impurity to a large number of people.
25.The commentaries question why the Rambam requires a corpse found in the road to be taken to the cemetery. In Hilchot Tum'at Meit 8:7, he states that in such an instance, a corpse may be buried in a nearby field. This indeed is the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 364:3).
26.I.e., from the seventeenth of Cheshvan on. Until then, passersby will not do any damage to the fields. Once the rains descend, however, the seeds begin to take root, and treading on them would damage them.
27.The Tur (Choshen Mishpat 274) quotes this ruling. The Shulchan Aruch, however, does not mention these laws. The Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 274:1) quotes the Tur's view and questions why the Shulchan Aruch ignored these laws. He explains that it is possible that the Shulchan Aruch also maintains that these laws are applicable in the diaspora, but failed to mention them because it was uncommon for Jews to own land at that time.The concept that these laws apply in the diaspora is somewhat difficult according to the Maggid Mishneh (and Rashi), who explain that the motivating rationale for these laws is the concern for yishuv Eretz Yisrael, the settlement of our Holy Land. Others explain that these provisions are intended to avoid strife and friction.
28.For this will cause damage to the land there.
29.In the time of the Temple, these animals were offered as sacrifices. Even after the Temple's destruction, it is still a mitzvah to celebrate on the festivals by eating meat (Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 6:18).
30.For these feasts are also considered to be se'udot mitzvah (feasts associated with the performance of a mitzvah).
31.From this, we can assume that these laws would apply in any community where most of the lands are owned by Jews.
32.In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Bava Kama 7:7), the Rambam states that this law applies to all animals that are forbidden to be eaten. (See also The Guide for the Perplexed, Volume III, Chapter 48, which speaks of the unfavorable tendencies brought about by eating pork.)From the conclusion of this halachah, however, it appears that the Rambam is focusing on a different rationale: the material and not the spiritual damage that pigs can cause.
33.For they will serve as watchdogs and raise a clamor in the event of attack.
34.Bava Kama 82b, 83a.
35.If he were required to sell his entire herd immediately, it is possible that he would have to reduce the price of the animals. Our Sages feared that the possibility of this loss would intimidate the shepherd and prevent him from repenting.
____________________________
Hayom Yom:
Tuesday, 14 Elul 5774 • 9 September 2014
"Today's Day"
Tuesday, Elul 14, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Tavo, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 72-76. Also 40-42.
Tanya: XV. "To understand (p. 465) ...which compounds them. (p. 465).
From my father's guiding instructions: Keep away - to the ultimate degree - from a campaign of attack. Not because we lack the means of prevailing or because of timorousness, but because we must consecrate all our strength exclusively to strengthening our own structure, the edifice of Torah and mitzvot performed in holiness and purity. To this we must devote ourselves utterly, with actual mesirat nefesh,1 not merely with potential mesirat nefesh.
FOOTNOTES
1. Self-sacrifice.
____________________________
Daily Thought:
Natural ResponseTuesday, Elul 14, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Tavo, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 72-76. Also 40-42.
Tanya: XV. "To understand (p. 465) ...which compounds them. (p. 465).
From my father's guiding instructions: Keep away - to the ultimate degree - from a campaign of attack. Not because we lack the means of prevailing or because of timorousness, but because we must consecrate all our strength exclusively to strengthening our own structure, the edifice of Torah and mitzvot performed in holiness and purity. To this we must devote ourselves utterly, with actual mesirat nefesh,1 not merely with potential mesirat nefesh.
FOOTNOTES
1. Self-sacrifice.
____________________________
Daily Thought:
There is an easy path to fulfill the Torah. Not by forcing yourself, not by convincing yourself, but by achieving awareness:
A constant awareness that all you see and hear—the wind that strokes your face, the pulse of the heart within your bosom, the stars in the heavens and the earth beneath your feet, all things of this cosmos and beyond—all are but the outer garments of an Inner Consciousness, a projection of His will and thoughts. Nothing more than His words to us, within which He is concealed.
And the Master of that consciousness speaks to you and asks you to join Him in the mystic union of deed and study.
In such a state of mind, could you possibly choose otherwise?(Tanya, part 1, chapters 21 and 41.)
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment