Chabad - Today in Judaism - TODAY IS: Monday, 10 Cheshvan 5775 • 3 November 2014

Chabad - Today in Judaism - TODAY IS: Monday, 10 Cheshvan 5775 • 3 November 2014
Today's Laws & Customs:

Today in Jewish History:
DAILY QUOTE:
You speak of what you need, but you say nothing of what you are needed for9Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi (to a chassid who complained of his financial troubles))

DAILY STUDY:
CHITAS AND RAMBAM FOR TODAY:
Chumash: Parshat Vayeira, 2nd Portion (Genesis 18:15-18:33) with Rashi
• Chapter 18
15. And Sarah denied, saying, "I did not laugh," because she was afraid. And He said, "No, but you laughed." טו. וַתְּכַחֵשׁ שָׂרָה | לֵאמֹר לֹא צָחַקְתִּי כִּי | יָרֵאָה וַיֹּאמֶר | לֹא כִּי צָחָקְתְּ:
because she was afraid… but you laughed: The first כִּי serves as an expression of “because,” for it gives the reason for the matter:“And Sarah denied…because she was afraid,” and the second כִּי serves as an expression of “but.” And He said,“It is not as you say, but you did laugh.” For our Sages said: כִּי has four different meanings: if, perhaps, but, and because. — [from R.H. 3a]
כי יראה וגו' כי צחקת: הראשון משמש לשון דהא שנותן טעם לדבר ותכחש שרה לפי שיראה, והשני משמש בלשון אלא, ויאמר לא כדבריך הוא אלא צחקת, שאמרו רבותינו כי משמש בארבע לשונות אי, דילמא, אלא, דהא:
16. And the men arose from there, and they looked upon Sodom, and Abraham went with them to escort them, טז. וַיָּקֻמוּ מִשָּׁם הָאֲנָשִׁים וַיַּשְׁקִפוּ עַל פְּנֵי סְדֹם וְאַבְרָהָם הֹלֵךְ עִמָּם לְשַׁלְּחָם:
and they looked: Heb. וַיַשְׁקִיפוּ. Whenever the word הַשְׁקָפָה occurs in Scripture, it denotes evil, except (Deut. 26:15) “Look (הַשְׁקִיפָה) from Your holy dwelling,” for the power of gifts to the poor is so great that it converts the Divine attribute of wrath to mercy. — [from Tan. Ki Thissa 14]
וישקיפו על פני סדום: כל השקפה שבמקרא לרעה חוץ מהשקיפה ממעון קדשך (דברים כו טו), שגדול כח מתנות עניים שהופך מדת רוגז לרחמים:
to escort them: Heb. לְשַׁלְּחָם, to escort them. He thought that they were wayfarers. — [from Zohar, vol. 1, 104a]
לשלחם: ללוותם, כסבור אורחים הם:
17. And the Lord said, "Shall I conceal from Abraham what I am doing? יז. וַיהֹוָה אָמָר הַמֲכַסֶּה אֲנִי מֵאַבְרָהָם אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי עֹשֶׂה:
Shall I conceal: Heb. הַמְכַסֶה ? This is a question.[i. e., The “hey” is not the definite article but the interrogative “hey.”]
המכסה אני: בתמיה:
what I am doing: in Sodom? It would be improper for Me to do this thing without his knowledge. I gave him this land, and these five cities are his, as it is said (10:19): “And the border of the Canaanite was from Sidon…, as you come to Sodom and Gomorrah, etc.” I called him Abraham, the father of a multitude of nations. Now, can I destroy the sons without informing the father, who loves Me?- [from Gen. Rabbah 49:2, Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer ch. 25]
אשר אני עושה: בסדום, לא יפה לי לעשות דבר זה שלא מדעתו, אני נתתי לו את הארץ הזאת, וחמשה כרכין הללו שלו הן, שנאמר (י יט) גבול הכנעני מצידון וגו' בואכה סדומה ועמורה וגו'. קראתי אותו אברהם, אב המון גוים, ואשמיד את הבנים ולא אודיע לאב שהוא אוהבי:
18. And Abraham will become a great and powerful nation, and all the nations of the world will be blessed in him. יח. וְאַבְרָהָם הָיוֹ יִהְיֶה לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל וְעָצוּם וְנִבְרְכוּ בוֹ כֹּל גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ:
And Abraham will become: [According to] a Midrash Aggadah (Yoma 38b) (Prov. 10:7):“The mention of a righteous man is for a blessing.” Since He mentioned him, He blessed him. Its simple meaning is, however: Shall I conceal this from him? He is so dear to Me as to become a great nation, and through him will be blessed all the nations of the earth.
ואברהם היו יהיה: מדרש אגדה (משלי י ז) זכר צדיק לברכה, הואיל והזכירו ברכו. ופשוטו וכי ממנו אני מעלים, והרי הוא חביב לפני להיות לגוי גדול ולהתברך בו כל גויי הארץ:
19. For I have known him because he commands his sons and his household after him, that they should keep the way of the Lord to perform righteousness and justice, in order that the Lord bring upon Abraham that which He spoke concerning him." יט. כִּי יְדַעְתִּיו לְמַעַן אֲשֶׁר יְצַוֶּה אֶת בָּנָיו וְאֶת בֵּיתוֹ אַחֲרָיו וְשָׁמְרוּ דֶּרֶךְ יְהֹוָה לַעֲשׂוֹת צְדָקָה וּמִשְׁפָּט לְמַעַן הָבִיא יְהֹוָה עַל אַבְרָהָם אֵת אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר עָלָיו:
For I have known him: Heb. יְדַעְתִּיו, an expression of love, like (Ruth 2:1) “a kinsman (מוֹדַע) of her husband”; (ibid. 3:2) “And now, Boaz our kinsman (מֹדַעְתָּנוּ)”; (Exod. 33:17): “and I shall know you (וָאֵדָעֲךָ) by name.” But, in fact, the primary meaning of them all is none other than an expression of knowing, for if one loves a person, he draws him near to himself and knows him and is familiar with him. Now why do I love him? “Because he commands” … for he commands his sons concerning Me, to keep My ways. But if you explain it as the Targum renders: “I know about him that he will command his sons, etc.,” the word לְמַעַן does not fit into the sense [of the verse].
כי ידעתיו: לשון חיבה, כמו (רות ב א) מודע לאישה, (שם ג ב) הלא בועז מודעתנו, (שמות לג יז) ואדעך בשם, ואמנם עיקר לשון כולם אינו אלא לשון ידיעה, שהמחבב את האדם מקרבו אצלו ויודעו ומכירו. ולמה ידעתיו, למען אשר יצוה לפי שהוא מצוה את בניו עלי לשמור דרכי. ואם תפרשהו כתרגומו יודע אני בו שיצוה את בניו וגו', אין למען נופל על הלשון:
because he commands: Heb. יְצַוֶּה, a present tense (i.e., a habitual action), like (Job 1:5) “So would Job do (יַעֲשֶׂה)”; [(Num. 9:20) “in accordance to the utterance of the Lord they would camp” (יַחֲנוּ)].
יצוה: לשון הווה, כמו (איוב א ה) ככה יעשה איוב:
in order that [the Lord] bring: So would he command his sons, “Keep the way of the Lord in order that the Lord bring upon Abraham, etc.” It does not say “upon the house of Abraham” but “upon Abraham.” We learn from this that whoever raises a righteous son is considered as though he does not die. — [from Gen. Rabbah 49:4]
למען הביא: כך הוא מצוה לבניו שמרו דרך ה' כדי שיביא ה' על אברהם וגו'. על בית אברהם לא נאמר, אלא על אברהם, למדנו כל המעמיד בן צדיק כאלו אינו מת:
20. And the Lord said, "Since the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah has become great, and since their sin has become very grave, כ. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה זַעֲקַת סְדֹם וַעֲמֹרָה כִּי רָבָּה וְחַטָּאתָם כִּי כָבְדָה מְאֹד:
And the Lord said: to Abraham, for He did as He had said, that He would not conceal from him.
ויאמר ה': אל אברהם, שעשה כאשר אמר שלא יכסה ממנו:
since [it] has become great: Wherever רָבָּה appears in Scripture, the accent is on the last syllable, on the “beth,” because they are translated: “great” , or “becoming great.” But this one has its accent on the first syllable, on the “resh,” because it is to be translated: “has already become great,” as I have explained regarding (above 15:17):“Now it came to pass that the sun had set (בָּאָה)” ; (Ruth 1:15):“Lo, your sister-in-law has returned (שָׁבָה) .”
כי רבה: כל רבה שבמקרא הטעם למטה בבי"ת, לפי שהן מתורגמין גדולה, או גדלה והולכת, אבל זה טעמו למעלה ברי"ש, לפי שמתורגם גדלה כבר, כמו שפירשתי לעיל (טו יז) ויהי השמש באה, (רות א טו) הנה שבה יבמתך:
21. I will descend now and see, whether according to her cry, which has come to Me, they have done; [I will wreak] destruction [upon them]; and if not, I will know." כא. אֵרֲדָה נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה הַכְּצַעֲקָתָהּ הַבָּאָה אֵלַי עָשׂוּ | כָּלָה וְאִם לֹא אֵדָעָה:
I will descend now: This teaches judges that they should not decide capital punishment cases unless they see it [i.e., they must go to the site of the crime and investigate the matter.]- [Divrei David] Everything is as I explained in the chapter dealing with the dispersion (Tan. Noah 18). Another explanation: I will descend to the end of their deeds (to fathom the results thereof). - [Be’er Mayim Chayim]).
ארדה נא ואראה: למד לדיינים שלא יפסקו דיני נפשות אלא בראיה, הכל כמו שפירשתי בפרשת הפלגה (לעיל יא ז). דבר אחר ארדה נא לסוף מעשיהם:
whether according to her cry: [i.e., the cry] of the land.
הכצעקתה: של מדינה:
which has come to Me, they have done: And [if] they remain in their state of rebellion, I will wreak destruction upon them, but if they do not remain in their state of rebellion, I will know what I will do, to punish them with suffering, but I will not destroy them. Similar to this we find elsewhere (Exod. 33:5): “But now, leave off your ornament from yourself, so that I may know what to do to you.” Therefore, there is a pause marked by the cantillation sign of a פְּסִיק between עָשׂוּ and כָּלָה, in order to separate one word from another. Our Sages, however, interpreted הַכְּצַעֲקָתָה to refer to the cry of a certain girl, whom they killed with an unusual death because she gave food to a poor man, as is delineated in [chapter] Chelek (Sanh. 109b).
הבאה אלי עשו: ואם עומדים במרדם כלה אני עושה בהם. ואם לא יעמדו במרדן, אדעה מה אעשה להפרע מהן ביסורין ולא אכלה אותן. וכיוצא בו מצינו במקום אחר (שמות לג ה) ועתה הורד עדיך מעליך ואדעה מה אעשה לך, ולפיכך יש הפסק נקודת פסיק בין עשו לכלה, כדי להפריד תיבה מחברתה. ורבותינו דרשו הכצעקתה, צעקת ריבה אחת שהרגוה מיתה משונה על שנתנה מזון לעני, כמפורש בחלק (סנהדרין קט ב):
22. And the men turned from there and went to Sodom, and Abraham was still standing before the Lord. כב. וַיִּפְנוּ מִשָּׁם הָאֲנָשִׁים וַיֵּלְכוּ סְדֹמָה וְאַבְרָהָם עוֹדֶנּוּ עֹמֵד לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה:
And [the men] turned from there: from the place to which Abraham had escorted them.
ויפנו משם: ממקום שאברהם ליוום שם:
and Abraham was still standing, etc.: But is it not so that he did not go to stand before Him, but the Holy One, blessed be He, came to him and said to him (above verse 20): “Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah has become great, etc.,” and it should have been written here: “and the Lord was still standing beside Abraham?” But this is a scribal emendation (Gen. Rabbah 49:7).
ואברהם עודנו עומד לפני ה': והלא לא הלך לעמוד לפניו אלא הקב"ה בא אצלו ואמר לו (פסוק כ) זעקת סדום ועמורה כי רבה, והיה לו לכתוב וה' עודנו עומד לפני אברהם, אלא תיקון סופרים הוא זה (אשר הפכוהו ז"ל לכתוב כן):
23. And Abraham approached and said, "Will You even destroy the righteous with the wicked? כג. וַיִּגַּשׁ אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמַר הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה צַדִּיק עִם רָשָׁע:
And Abraham approached and said: We find [the expression]“ approaching” for war (II Sam. 10:13): “And Joab drew forward, etc.” ; and “approaching” for placating (below 44:8): “And Judah approached him” ; and “approaching” for prayer (I Kings 18:36):“And Elijah the prophet came near.” For all these, Abraham approached: to speak harshly [i.e., when he requested justice], to placate, and to pray. — [from Gen. Rabbah 49:8]
ויגש אברהם: מצינו הגשה למלחמה (ש"ב י יג) ויגש יואב וגו', הגשה לפיוס (להלן מד יח) ויגש אליו יהודה, והגשה לתפלה (מלכים א' יח לו) ויגש אליהו הנביא, ולכל אלה נכנס אברהם, לדבר קשות, ולפיוס ולתפלה:
Will You even destroy: Heb. הַאַף. Will You also destroy? And according to the translation of Onkelos, who rendered אַף as an expression of wrath, this is its interpretation: Will wrath entice You that You should destroy the righteous with the wicked?
האף תספה: הגם תספה. ולתרגום של אונקלוס שתרגמו לשון רוגז, כך פירושו האף ישיאך שתספה צדיק עם רשע:
24. Perhaps there are fifty righteous men in the midst of the city; will You even destroy and not forgive the place for the sake of the fifty righteous men who are in its midst? כד. אוּלַי יֵשׁ חֲמִשִּׁים צַדִּיקִם בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה וְלֹא תִשָּׂא לַמָּקוֹם לְמַעַן חֲמִשִּׁים הַצַּדִּיקִם אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבָּהּ:
Perhaps there are fifty righteous men: ten righteous men for each city, because there were five places. — [from Targum Jonathan]
אולי יש חמשים צדיקים: עשרה צדיקים לכל כרך וכרך, כי חמשה מקומות יש:
25. Far be it from You to do a thing such as this, to put to death the righteous with the wicked so that the righteous should be like the wicked. Far be it from You! Will the Judge of the entire earth not perform justice?" כה. חָלִלָה לְּךָ מֵעֲשׂת | כַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה לְהָמִית צַדִּיק עִם רָשָׁע וְהָיָה כַצַּדִּיק כָּרָשָׁע חָלִלָה לָּךְ הֲשֹׁפֵט כָּל הָאָרֶץ לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה מִשְׁפָּט:
Far be it from You: And if You say that the righteous will not save the wicked, why should You kill the righteous?- [from Gen. Rabbah 49:8]
חלילה לך: ואם תאמר לא יצילו הצדיקים את הרשעים, למה תמית הצדיקים:
Far be it from You: Heb. חָלִילָה. It is profane (חוּלִין) , [i.e., unfitting] for You. They will say, “So is His craft. He inundates everyone, righteous and wicked.” So You did to the Generation of the Flood and to the Generation of the Dispersion. — [from Tan. Vayera 8]
חלילה לך: חולין הוא לך, יאמרו כך הוא אומנתו, שוטף הכל, צדיקים ורשעים, כך עשית לדור המבול ולדור הפלגה:
a thing such as this: Neither this nor anything similar to it. —
כדבר הזה: לא הוא ולא כיוצא בו:
Far be it from You: for the World to Come. — [from Tan. Buber]
חלילה לך: לעולם הבא:
Will the Judge of the entire earth: The “hey” of הֲשֹׁפֵט is vowelized with a “chataf pattach,” as an expression of wonder: Will He Who judges not perform true justice?!
השופט כל הארץ: נקוד בחטף פת"ח ה"א של השופט לשון תמיה, וכי מי שהוא שופט לא יעשה משפט אמת:
26. And the Lord said, "If I find in Sodom fifty righteous men within the city, I will forgive the entire place for their sake." כו. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אִם אֶמְצָא בִסְדֹם חֲמִשִּׁים צַדִּיקִם בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר וְנָשָׂאתִי לְכָל הַמָּקוֹם בַּעֲבוּרָם:
"If I find in Sodom, etc., the entire place”: [Sodom refers to] all the cities, but because Sodom was the metropolis and the most important of them all, Scripture ascribes [the fifty righteous men] to it.
אם אמצא בסדום וגו' לכל המקום: לכל הכרכים, לפי שסדום היתה מטרפולין וחשובה מכולם תלה בה הכתוב:
27. And Abraham answered and said, "Behold now I have commenced to speak to the Lord, although I am dust and ashes. כז. וַיַּעַן אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמַר הִנֵּה נָא הוֹאַלְתִּי לְדַבֵּר אֶל אֲדֹנָי וְאָנֹכִי עָפָר וָאֵפֶר:
although I am dust and ashes: I was already fit to be dust at the hands of the kings and ashes at the hands of Nimrod, were it not for Your mercies that stood by me.
ואנכי עפר ואפר: וכבר הייתי ראוי להיות עפר על ידי המלכים, ואפר על ידי נמרוד, לולי רחמיך אשר עמדו לי:
28. Perhaps the fifty righteous men will be missing five. Will You destroy the entire city because of five?" And He said, "I will not destroy if I find there forty-five." כח. אוּלַי יַחְסְרוּן חֲמִשִּׁים הַצַּדִּיקִם חֲמִשָּׁה הֲתַשְׁחִית בַּחֲמִשָּׁה אֶת כָּל הָעִיר וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אַשְׁחִית אִם אֶמְצָא שָׁם אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה:
Will You destroy because of five: Will there not be nine for each city? And You, the Righteous One of the world, will be counted with them. — [from Gen. Rabbah 49:9]
התשחית בחמשה: והלא הן תשעה לכל כרך, ואתה צדיקו של עולם תצטרף עמהם:
29. And he continued further to speak to Him, and he said, "Perhaps forty will be found there." And He said, "I will not do it for the sake of the forty." כט. וַיֹּסֶף עוֹד לְדַבֵּר אֵלָיו וַיֹּאמַר אוּלַי יִמָּצְאוּן שָׁם אַרְבָּעִים וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אֶעֱשֶׂה בַּעֲבוּר הָאַרְבָּעִים:
Perhaps forty will be found there: And four cities will be saved, and so thirty will save three of them, or twenty will save two of them, or ten will save one of them. — [from Zohar, vol. 1, omissions, 255b]
אולי ימצאון שם ארבעים: וימלטו ארבעה הכרכים, וכן שלשים יצילו שלשה מהם או עשרים יצילו שנים מהם או עשרה יצילו אחד מהם:
30. And he said, "Please, let the Lord's wrath not be kindled, and I will speak. Perhaps thirty will be found there." And He said, "I will not do it if I find thirty there." ל. וַיֹּאמֶר אַל נָא יִחַר לַאדֹנָי וַאֲדַבֵּרָה אוּלַי יִמָּצְאוּן שָׁם שְׁלשִׁים וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אֶעֱשֶׂה אִם אֶמְצָא שָׁם שְׁלשִׁים:
31. And he said, "Behold now I have desired to speak to the Lord, perhaps twenty will be found there." And He said, "I will not destroy for the sake of the twenty." לא. וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּה נָא הוֹאַלְתִּי לְדַבֵּר אֶל אֲדֹנָי אוּלַי יִמָּצְאוּן שָׁם עֶשְׂרִים וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אַשְׁחִית בַּעֲבוּר הָעֶשְׂרִים:
Behold now I have desired: Heb. הוֹאַלְתִּי. I have desired, as in (Exod. 2:21):“And Moses was willing (וַיוֹאֶל) .”
הואלתי: רציתי כמו (שמות ב כא) ויואל משה:
32. And he said, "Please, let the Lord's wrath not be kindled, and I will speak yet this time, perhaps ten will be found there." And He said, "I will not destroy for the sake of the ten." לב. וַיֹּאמֶר אַל נָא יִחַר לַאדֹנָי וַאֲדַבְּרָה אַךְ הַפַּעַם אוּלַי יִמָּצְאוּן שָׁם עֲשָׂרָה וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אַשְׁחִית בַּעֲבוּר הָעֲשָׂרָה:
perhaps ten will be found there: For fewer [than ten] he did not ask. He said, “In the Generation of the Flood, there were eight: Noah and his sons, and their wives, but they did not save their generation.” And for nine, together with counting [God] he had already asked, but did not find.
אולי ימצאון שם עשרה: על פחות לא בקש. אמר דור המבול היו שמונה, נח ובניו ונשיהם ולא הצילו על דורם, ועל תשעה על ידי צירוף כבר בקש ולא מצא:
33. And the Lord departed when He finished speaking to Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place. לג. וַיֵּלֶךְ יְהֹוָה כַּאֲשֶׁר כִּלָּה לְדַבֵּר אֶל אַבְרָהָם וְאַבְרָהָם שָׁב לִמְקֹמוֹ:
And the Lord departed, etc.: Since the defender was silent, the Judge left.
וילך ה' וגו': כיון שנשתתק הסניגור הלך לו הדיין:
and Abraham returned to his place: The Judge left, the defender left, and the prosecutor is accusing. Therefore: “And the two angels came to Sodom,” to destroy (Gen. Rabbah 49:14). One to destroy Sodom and one to save Lot, and he [the latter] is the same one who came to heal Abraham, but the third one, who came to announce [Isaac’s birth] to Sarah, since he had performed his mission, he departed (Tan. Vayera 8).
ואברהם שב למקומו: נסתלק הדיין נסתלק הסניגור והקטיגור מקטרג, ולפיכך (יט א) ויבאו שני המלאכים סדומה [בערב] להשחית. אחד להשחית את סדום ואחד להציל את לוט, והוא אותו שבא לרפאות את אברהם. והשלישי שבא לבשר את שרה, כיון שעשה שליחותו נסתלק לו:
___________________________
Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 55-59
• Chapter 55
David composed this psalm upon escaping from Jerusalem in the face of the slanderers, Doeg and Achitofel, who had declared him deserving of death. David had considered Achitofel a friend and accorded him the utmost honor, but Achitofel betrayed him and breached their covenant. David curses all his enemies, so that all generations should "know, and sin no more."
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music, a maskil by David.
2. Listen to my prayer, O God, do not hide from my pleas.
3. Pay heed to me and answer me, as I lament in my distress and moan -
4. because of the shout of the enemy and the oppression of the wicked; for they accuse me of evil and hate me passionately.
5. My heart shudders within me, and the terrors of death have descended upon me.
6. Fear and trembling penetrate me, and I am enveloped with horror.
7. And I said, "If only I had wings like the dove! I would fly off and find rest.
8. Behold, I would wander afar, and lodge in the wilderness forever.
9. I would hurry to find shelter for myself from the stormy wind, from the tempest.”
10. Consume, O Lord, confuse their tongue; for I have seen violence and strife in the city.1
11. Day and night they encircle her upon her walls, and iniquity and vice are in her midst.
12. Treachery is within her; fraud and deceit never depart from her square.
13. For it is not the enemy who taunts me-that I could bear; nor my foe who raises himself against me, that I could hide from him.
14. But it is you, a man of my equal, my guide and my intimate.
15. Together we took sweet counsel; we walked with the throng to the house of God.
16. May He incite death upon them, let them descend to the pit alive; for there is evil in their dwelling, within them.
17. As for me, I call to God, and the Lord will save me.
18. Evening, morning and noon, I lament and moan-and He hears my voice.
19. He redeemed my soul in peace from battles against me, because of the many who were with me.
20. May God-He who is enthroned from the days of old, Selah-hear and humble those in whom there is no change, and who do not fear God.
21. He extended his hands against his allies, he profaned his covenant.
22. Smoother than butter are the words of his mouth, but war is in his heart; his words are softer than oil, yet they are curses.
23. Cast your burden upon the Lord, and He will sustain you; He will never let the righteous man falter.
24. And You, O God, will bring them down to the nethermost pit; bloodthirsty and treacherous men shall not live out half their days; but I will trust in You.
Chapter 56
David composed this psalm while in mortal danger at the palace of Achish, brother of Goliath. In his distress David accepts vows upon himself.
1. For the Conductor, of the mute dove1 far away. By David, a michtam, 2 when the Philistines seized him in Gath.
2. Favor me, O God, for man longs to swallow me; the warrior oppresses me every day.
3. My watchful enemies long to swallow me every day, for many battle me, O Most High!
4. On the day I am afraid, I trust in You.
5. [I trust] in God and praise His word; in God I trust, I do not fear-what can [man of] flesh do to me?
6. Every day they make my words sorrowful; all their thoughts about me are for evil.
7. They gather and hide, they watch my steps, when they hope [to capture] my soul.
8. Should escape be theirs in reward for their iniquity? Cast down the nations in anger, O God!
9. You have counted my wanderings; place my tears in Your flask-are they not in Your record?
10. When my enemies will retreat on the day I cry out, with this I will know that God is with me.
11. When God deals strictly, I praise His word; when the Lord deals mercifully, I praise His word.
12. In God I trust, I do not fear-what can man do to me?
13. My vows to You are upon me, O God; I will repay with thanksgiving offerings to You.
14. For You saved my soul from death-even my feet from stumbling-to walk before God in the light of life.
Chapter 57
David composed this psalm while hiding from Saul in a cave, facing grave danger. Like Jacob did when confronted with Esau, David prayed that he neither be killed nor be forced to kill. In the merit of his trust in God, God wrought wonders to save him.
1. For the Conductor, a plea to be spared destruction. By David, a michtam, when he fled from Saul in the cave.
2. Favor me, O God, favor me, for in You my soul took refuge, and in the shadow of Your wings I will take refuge until the disaster passes.
3. I will call to God the Most High; to the Almighty Who fulfills [His promise] to me.
4. He will send from heaven, and save me from the humiliation of those who long to swallow me, Selah; God will send forth His kindness and truth.
5. My soul is in the midst of lions, I lie among fiery men; their teeth are spears and arrows, their tongue a sharp sword.
6. Be exalted above the heavens, O God; let Your glory be upon all the earth.
7. They laid a trap for my steps, they bent down my soul; they dug a pit before me, [but] they themselves fell into it, Selah.
8. My heart is steadfast, O God, my heart is steadfast; I will sing and chant praise.
9. Awake, my soul! Awake, O harp and lyre! I shall awaken the dawn.
10. I will thank You among the nations, my Lord; I will praise You among the peoples.
11. For Your kindness reaches till the heavens, Your truth till the skies.
12. Be exalted above the heavens, O God; let Your glory be over all the earth.
Chapter 58
David expresses the anguish caused him by Avner and his other enemies, who justified Saul's pursuit of him.
1. For the Conductor, a plea to be spared destruction; by David, a michtam.
2. Is it true that you are mute [instead of] speaking justice? [Instead of] judging men with fairness?
3. Even with your heart you wreak injustice upon the land; you justify the violence of your hands.
4. The wicked are estranged from the womb; from birth do the speakers of falsehood stray.
5. Their venom is like the venom of a snake; like the deaf viper that closes its ear
6. so as not to hear the voice of charmers, [even] the most skillful caster of spells.
7. O God, smash their teeth in their mouth; shatter the fangs of the young lions, O Lord.
8. Let them melt like water and disappear; when He aims His arrows, may they crumble.
9. Like the snail that melts as it goes along, like the stillbirth of a woman-they never see the sun.
10. Before your tender shoots know [to become] hardened thorns, He will blast them away, as one [uprooting] with vigor and wrath.
11. The righteous one will rejoice when he sees revenge; he will bathe his feet in the blood of the wicked.
12. And man will say, "There is indeed reward for the righteous; indeed there is a God Who judges in the land."
Chapter 59
This psalm speaks of the great miracle David experienced when he eluded danger by escaping through a window, unnoticed by the guards at the door. The prayers, supplications, and entreaties he offered then are recorded here.
1. For the Conductor, a plea to be spared destruction, By David, a michtam, when Saul dispatched [men], and they guarded the house in order to kill him.
2. Rescue me from my enemies, my God; raise me above those who rise against me.
3. Rescue me from evildoers, save me from men of bloodshed.
4. For behold they lie in ambush for my soul, mighty ones gather against me-not because of my sin nor my transgression, O Lord.
5. Without iniquity [on my part,] they run and prepare-awaken towards me and see!
6. And You, Lord, God of Hosts, God of Israel, wake up to remember all the nations; do not grant favor to any of the iniquitous traitors, Selah.
7. They return toward evening, they howl like the dog and circle the city.
8. Behold, they spew with their mouths, swords are in their lips, for [they say], "Who hears?”
9. But You, Lord, You laugh at them; You mock all nations.
10. [Because of] his might, I wait for You, for God is my stronghold.
11. The God of my kindness will anticipate my [need]; God will show me [the downfall] of my watchful foes.
12. Do not kill them, lest my nation forget; drive them about with Your might and impoverish them, O our Shield, my Master,
13. [for] the sin of their mouth, the word of their lips; let them be trapped by their arrogance. At the sight of their accursed state and deterioration, [people] will recount.
14. Consume them in wrath, consume them and they will be no more; and they will know that God rules in Jacob, to the ends of the earth, Selah.
15. And they will return toward evening, they will howl like the dog and circle the city.
16. They will wander about to eat; when they will not be sated they will groan.
17. As for me, I shall sing of Your might, and sing joyously of Your kindness toward morning, for You have been a stronghold to me, a refuge on the day of my distress.
18. [You are] my strength, to You I will sing, for God is my stronghold, the God of my kindness.
____________________________
Tanya: Iggeret HaKodesh, end of Epistle 26
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
Monday, 10 Cheshvan 5775 • 3 November 2014
Iggeret HaKodesh, end of Epistle 26
The above applies nowadays, when the Shechinah is exiled in kelipat nogah; hence the main function of Torah study is to seek out and elevate the sparks of holiness from the kelipot. Hence, too, the current concentration on the laws of issur and hetter, kasher and passul, and the like.
אבל בצאת השכינה מקליפת נוגה [נ"א מהקליפות]
But when the Shechinah will emerge from kelipat nogah [1or: from the kelipot],
אחר שיושלם בירור הניצוצות, ויופרד הרע מהטוב, ויתפרדו כל פועלי און
after the extraction of the sparks will be completed, and the evil of the kelipot will be separated from the good of holiness,2 “and all the workers of evil will be dispersed,”
ולא שלטא אילנא דטוב ורע, בצאת הטוב ממנה
and the Tree of [Knowledge of] Good and Evil (which is of kelipat nogah and which prevails during the time of exile) will no longer be dominant, because the good will have departed from it,
Kelipat nogah is influential only by virtue of its minimal component of good; as soon as this is extracted, kelipat nogah will have no dominion whatever.
אזי לא יהיה עסק התורה והמצות לברר בירורין
then people will engage in the study of Torah and in the observance of the commandments not in order to extract the sparks, as in the present,
כי אם ליחד יחודים עליונים יותר, להמשיך אורות עליונים יותר, שלמעלה מהאצילות
but in order to bring about the consummation of yichudim (“unions” or “marriages” of Sefirot) more sublime than those which are effected through our present Torah study — in order to call forth more sublime lights, transcending3 Atzilut.
כמו שכתב האריז״ל
This is explained in the writings of R. Isaac Luria, of blessed memory.
והכל על ידי פנימיות התורה, לקיים המצות בכוונות עליונות, שמכונות לאורות עליונים
Everything [will be accomplished] by means of the pnimiyut of the Torah, the esoteric dimension of the Torah, by the performance of the commandments with lofty mystical devotions directed to [drawing down] sublime “lights” [from the Divine Luminary].
כי שרש המצות הוא למעלה מעלה, באין סוף ברוך הוא
For the root of the commandments is exceedingly high, in the blessed Ein Sof, at a level loftier than Atzilut.
(ומה שאמרו רז״ל, דמצות בטילות לעתיד לבא
(4As for the statement of our Sages, of blessed memory, that5 “the commandments will be abrogated in the future,”
היינו בתחיית המתים
this refers to the era of the Resurrection of the Dead.
אבל לימות המשיח, קודם תחיית המתים, אין בטלים)
In the days of the Messiah, however, before the Resurrection of the Dead, they will not be abrogated.)6
At that time, the observance of mitzvot will draw down to this world even higher levels of G‑dliness than those drawn down by the current observance of mitzvot.
ולכן יהיה גם עיקר עסק התורה גם כן בפנימיות המצות, וטעמיהם הנסתרים
This is why Torah study will then be mainly directed to the pnimiyut (the innermost, mystical depths) of the commandments, and their hidden reasons.
Specifically: Gaining insights into the dynamics of the above-mentioned yichudim, and thereby understanding why the scrupulous performance of the commandments brings about these Supernal “unions” which give birth to renewed diffusions of the Divine light that animates this world.
אבל הנגלות יהיו גלוים וידועים לכל איש ישראל, בידיעה בתחלה, בלי שכחה
The revealed aspects of the Torah, however, will be manifest and known to every Jew, by an innate and unforgotten knowledge.
Review will thus be unnecessary.
ואין צריך לעסוק בהם, אלא לערב רב
Only the mixed multitude (and not the Jews) will have to toil in these [aspects of the Torah],
שלא יזכו למטעם מאילנא דחיי, שהוא פנימיות התורה והמצוה
because they will not have merited to taste from the Tree of Life, i.e., the pnimiyut of the Torah and of the commandments.
וצריכים לעסוק [בתורה] במשנה, להתיש כח הסטרא אחרא הדבוק בהם (על ידי עסק התורה)
They will [therefore] need to engage [7in Torah] in Mishnah, in order to weaken (8by their occupation with Torah) the power of the sitra achra that cleaves to them,
שלא תשלוט בהם, להחטיאם
so that it will not dominate them and cause them to sin.
כדכתיב: והחוטא בן מאה שנה יקולל, שיהיו חוטאים מערב רב
Thus it is written,9 “And the sinner at the age of a hundred will be cursed.” This refers to the sinners of the mixed multitude.
Thus, even with the arrival of the Messiah there will be sinners among the mixed multitude, since the sitra achra cleaves to them. They will therefore require means by which to weaken it, so that they will not sin.
Nor will they need only the revealed aspects of the Torah in order to repel the sitra achra.
וגם למעשה יהיו צריכים לפרטי הלכות אסור וטומאה יותר מישראל
In addition, on the practical level, they will need the detailed rulings of prohibition and impurity more than the Jews.
שלא יארע להם פסול וטומאה ואסור
For the latter, nothing will occur that is ritually unfit, impure, or forbidden,
כי לא יאונה כו׳
since10 “there shall not befall [any sin to the righteous]”11 — and in the era of Mashiach, all Jews will be at the level of the “righteous”.
וגם אפשר, וקרוב הדבר, שידעו מפנימיות התורה, כל גופי התורה הנגלית
It is also possible, and indeed probable, that [the Jewish people] will know all the fundamentals of the revealed plane of the Torah from the pnimiyut of the Torah,
כמו אברהם אבינו, עליו השלום
as was the case with our father Abraham, peace be to him.
The Gemara relates12 that Abraham fulfilled the entire Torah even before it was given at Sinai. Now there are passages and commandments to which he could not possibly have related on a physical level.
Inscribed on the tiny parchment scrolls within tefillin, for example, are Biblical passages which record the Exodus from Egypt — a land to which his descendants had not yet been exiled. The mode of Abraham’s performance of the commandments was thus spiritual and esoteric, as the Alter Rebbe explains in Torah Or13 and Likkutei Torah.14
Abraham thus knew all the revealed aspects of Torah from its esoteric core. In Time to Come all Jews will know the Torah in a similar manner.
ולכן אין צריך לעסוק בהם כלל
They will therefore not need to occupy themselves with them — with the laws defining what is permitted or prohibited, pure or impure — at all.
מה שאין כן בזמן בית שני, היו צריכים לעסוק
At the time of the Second Temple, by contrast, although the scholars did not derive their sustenance from the illiterate, for they had their own fields and vineyards, they needed to be involved in these [laws],
גם כי לא בשביל הלכה למעשה בלבד, אלא שזהו עיקר העבודה
and not only for their practical application, but because this is the main purpose of divine service —
להתיש כח הסטרא אחרא, ולהעלות ניצוצי הקדושה, על ידי התורה והעבודה, כמו שכתוב במקום אחר
to weaken the power of the sitra achra and to elevate the sparks of holiness by means of Torah study and worship, as is explained elsewhere.15
* * *
ואחר הדברים והאמת האלו, יובן היטב בתוספת ביאור הרעיא מהימנא דלעיל
After the above words of truth it will be possible to clearly understand the earlier-quoted passage from Ra’aya Mehemna,
במה שאמר: אילנא דטוב ורע כו׳
which spoke of “the Tree of Good and Evil, [i.e., prohibition and permission],”
רצונו לומר: קליפת נוגה, שהוא עיקר עולם הזה
meaning kelipat nogah, which is the mainstay of this world,16
כמו שכתוב בעץ חיים
as is written in Etz Chayim.
At the moment, until Mashiach arrives, the dominant influence in this material world is kelipat nogah, the “Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.” After his arrival, however, this dominion will cease, and man’s divine service will be directed not to extracting the sparks of holiness hidden in the material world, but to bringing about ever higher Supernal unions, as explained above.
ודי למבין
This will suffice for the discerning.
Addendum
In the middle of the above Epistle, the Alter Rebbe stated that if “one ate [forbidden food] in order to save an endangered life,... [the food] becomes [entirely] permissible.”
The Rebbe notes17 that this concept is problematic; indeed, many editions of the Tanya omit the word “entirely”, which is evidently why it found its way into current editions as a bracketed text.
The Rebbe goes on to distinguish between prohibition (issur) and impurity (tumah). When something is prohibited, one can sense its inherent evil; for example, forbidden foods clog the mind and heart with spiritual congestion. Thus, even if a pregnant woman scented forbidden food on Yom Kippur and the Torah permitted her to eat it (if her life would otherwise be in danger),18 eating that food would still becloud her soul.
Moreover, even when the prohibition was not intrinsic to the food, but a thought or a statement invalidated it, as for example when an animal was slaughtered with idolatrous intent,19 eating this food leaves its imprint. Thus, for example, the Midrash20 traces the wayward path of Elisha ben Avuyah (known as “Acher”) to very early beginnings — before his birth his mother had tasted food that was prepared for idolatrous worship.
In light of the above, the Rebbe goes on to note, we can understand why a nursing mother who has eaten forbidden food, even when permitted to do so because her life was endangered, should refrain from nursing her child.21 For although eating this food was in fact halachically permitted, the nature of the food and the spiritual blemish which it imparts to her infant remain unchanged.
This is especially so, according to the halachic determination (with regard to one who is ill as well), that a life-threatening situation merely sets aside a prohibition; it does not make the prohibited object permissible.22
As the Rebbe concludes, the above considerations evidently explain why in current editions of Iggeret HaKodesh — regarding the food eaten in a life-threatening situation that becomes “[entirely] permissible” — the word “entirely” is bracket-ed, and in many editions never appeared.
FOOTNOTES
1. These brackets are in the original text.
2. Tehillim 92:10.
3. The word translated “transcending” does not appear in the printed Hebrew text. It has been inserted here according to the emendation of the Rebbe in Luach HaTikkun.
4. These parentheses are in the original text.
5. Niddah 61b.
6. This differentiation between the performance of mitzvot before and after the Resurrection, follows the view of Tosafot in Niddah (loc. cit.). There Tosafot explains that the fact that burial shrouds may be made of kilayim, the forbidden mixture of wool and linen, proves that mitzvot will be abrogated after the Resurrection, for otherwise a Jew would arise wearing forbidden garments.
The Rashba, cited there in Chiddushei HaRan, disagrees, holding that the mitzvot are abrogated as far as the individual is concerned only while he is deceased. As the Rashba understands the Gemara, they will not be abrogated after the Resurrection.
The Rebbe uses this debate to resolve a seeming contradiction between two statements by the Alter Rebbe. In his Note to ch. 36 of Tanya (on p. 478 of Vol. II in the present series), the Alter Rebbe writes that “the [time of] receiving the reward is essentially in the seventh millennium.” Since this is after the time of the Resurrection, this is a time during which we are still intended to perform mitzvot. How, then, does the Alter Rebbe state here that mitzvot will be abrogated at the time of the Resurrection?
The distinction: In the Note to ch. 36 the Alter Rebbe follows the view of the Rashba, who maintains that at the time of the Resurrection, mitzvot will continue to be in effect. (The Alter Rebbe also follows this view in his maamar in Likkutei Torah on the phrase VeHayah BaYom Hahu Yitaka BeShofar Gadol.) Here, however, he follows the view of Tosafot.
The Rebbe goes on to say that drawing a distinction (as the Alter Rebbe does above) between the two periods, resolves most of the problematic queries posed by the MaHaratz Chayot, whose Glosses on Tractate Niddah cite those Talmudic sources which would seem to indicate that in future time the commandments will not be abrogated. For those sources speak of the era of the Messiah, before the Resurrection, while the teaching that they will be abrogated applies to the era that follows the Resurrection (according to the view of Tosafot).
For further examonation of this subject, the Rebbe refers the reader to the sources listed in Sdei Chemed, Klalim 40:218 (Vol. III, p. 561c ff. in the Kehot edition) and in Divrei Chachamim, sec. 53 (p. 1962b ff.).
7. These brackets are in the original text.
8. This phrase, enclosed in parentheses in the printed Hebrew text, does not appear in some manuscripts.
9. Yeshayahu 65:20.
10. Mishlei 12:21.
11. Note of the Rebbe: “...For only with regard to the present time does Tosafot maintain (contrary to the view of Rashi) [that the promise of this verse applies] only to edibles (Chullin 5b), [for it is particularly shameful for a righteous person to eat forbidden food, even if unwittingly]. This [restriction to the present] may be derived from the underlying reasoning, viz.: In Time to Come the entire world will attain perfection. [At that time, therefore, no kind of unwitting sin will befall any of the Jewish people, since all will then be righteous].”
12. Yoma 28b; Kiddushin 82a.
13. Lech Lecha 11d.
14. Shemini 18c.
15. See Likkutei Torah, BeHaalot’cha 32d.
16. The last phrase in the Hebrew text has been emended according to the Table of Glosses and Emendations.
17. This Addendum is based on selections from Likkutei Sichot, Vol. III, p. 984ff., and footnotes there.
18. Yoma 82a; the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 617:2.
19. Chullin 39b.
20. Ruth Rabbah 6:6.
21. Taz (Turei Zahav) and Shach (Siftei Cohen) in Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, end of sec. 81.

22. Cf. Rambam, Hilchot Shabbat, beginning of ch. 2.
____________________________

Rambam: 
Daily Mitzvah P199, N240 Sefer Hamitzvot
Today's Mitzvah
Monday, 10 Cheshvan 5775 • 3 November 2014.
Positive Commandment 199 (Digest)
Making Collateral Available to the Debtor when Needed
"As the sun sets, you shall surely return the pledge to him"—Deuteronomy 24:13.
A creditor is commanded to return a debt collateral to its Jewish owner when he is in need of it. If the collateral is an item he needs during the daytime – e.g., the tools of his trade or an article of clothing – the creditor must return it to the debtor every day, and only take possession of it during the nighttime. If the collateral is an item needed by night – e.g., linens, blankets or pajamas – he must return it at night and only take possession of it again in the morning.
The 199th mitzvah is that we are commanded to return a security deposit to its Jewish owner when he needs it. If the objects are needed during the day, such as tools he works with, you must give them to him during the day and hold them only at night. If they are needed at night, such as a mat and blanket for sleeping, you must give them to him during the night and hold them only during the day.
In the words of the Mechilta: "The verse,1 'You must return it to him before sunrise' refers to a garment worn during the day, which you give to him for the entire day. What is the source for the law that a garment worn at night must be given to him for the entire night? The verse,2 'Return the security to him before the sun sets.' " Therefore our Sages said, "A day garment may be held at night and a night garment held during the day; the day garment is returned for the day and the night garment for the night."
It has already been explained in tractate Makkos3 that the verse4 "[When you make any kind of loan to your neighbor,] do not go into his house to take something as security" is a lav she'nitak l'aseh (a prohibition with a remedial positive commandment) — the positive command being "Return the security to him." In the words of the Sifri: "The verse 'Return [the security to him]' teaches that an article that is used during the day must be returned for the day, and one used at night for the night. A quilt is returned for the night and a plow for the day."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 9th chapter of tractate Bava Metzia.5
Rabbi Berel Bell is a well-known educator, author and lecturer. He and his family reside in Montreal, Canada.
From "Sefer Hamitzvot in English," published by Sichos in English.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 22:25.
2.Deut. 24:13.
3.16a.
4.Deut. 24:10.
5.113a.
________________________________________
Negative Commandment 240 (Digest)
Withholding Collateral from the Debtor when it's Needed
"You shall not sleep while holding his security"—Deuteronomy 24:12.
It is forbidden for a creditor to withhold a debt's collateral from its owner, the debtor, when he cannot do without it due to his poverty (see Positive Commandment 199). Rather he must return the collateral to him—an item used during the daytime must be returned for the duration of every day, and an item used at night must be returned for the duration of every night. As the Mishnah says, "He must return the pillow at night and the plow for the day."
The 240th prohibition is that we are forbidden from holding someone's security deposit during the time that he needs it. An article which is used during the day must be returned for the day, and one used at night for the night, as the Mishneh says,1 "A pillow is returned for the night and a plow for the day."
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "you may not go to sleep with his security." The Sifri explains, "[The verse means] 'you may not go to sleep with his security' in your possession." Instead, anything which he cannot replace due to his poverty must be returned to him, as explained in the verse,3 "[If you take your neighbor's garment as security, you must return it to him before sunset.] This alone is his covering, the garment for his skin."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 9th chapter of tractate Bava Metzia.
Rabbi Berel Bell is a well-known educator, author and lecturer. He and his family reside in Montreal, Canada.
From "Sefer Hamitzvot in English," published by Sichos in English.
FOOTNOTES
1.Bava Metzia 113a.
2.Deut. 24:12.
3.Ex. 22:26.
Translation of (the unabridged text of) Sefer Hamitzvot by Rabbi Berel Bell, member of the Rabbinical Court of Montreal and director of Teacher Training for the Jewish Learning Institute.

________________________________________

Rambam:

• 1 Chapter a Day: Edut - Chapter 14
Edut - Chapter 14
Halacha 1
Whenever a witness is disqualified from testifying on behalf of a colleague because he is married to the witness' relative, if that relative's wife dies, even if she left him sons, he is considered to have been released from any connection and is acceptable as a witness.
Halacha 2
When a person knew of evidence concerning a colleague before he became his son-in-law, and then became his son-in-law, he is not acceptable. The same law applies if a person was in control of his senses and then became a deaf-mute, was able to see and became blind - even though he is aware of the measure of land concerning which he testifies and can define its boundaries, or was intellectually and emotionally sound and then lost control of his faculties.
If, by contrast, a person knew of evidence concerning a colleague before he became his son-in-law, became his son-in-law, and then that colleague's daughterdied, the witness is acceptable. Similar laws apply if a person was in control of his senses, became a deaf-mute, and then regained control of his senses, was intellectually and emotionally sound, lost control of his faculties, and then regained control of them, or was able to see, became blind, and then regained his sight.
The general principle is: Whenever a person is an acceptable witness at the initial and the final stages, he is acceptable even though in the interim, he was not acceptable as a witness. If, however, initially he is unacceptable, even though ultimately, he would be acceptable, he is disqualified. Therefore when a person is aware of evidence as a child, it is of no consequence for him to testify with regard to it when he attains majority.
Halacha 3
There are matters concerning which we rely on the testimony which a person gives after he attains majority with regard to events that he observed when he was a child. The rationale is that these are matters of Rabbinical origin. The matters are as follows; a person's word is accepted when he states: a) "This is the signature of my father," "...my teacher," "...or my brother," the rationale is that the validation of legal documents is a Rabbinic requirement;
b) "I remember that when so-and-so was married, they performed the customs performed for a virgin"; since most women marry when virgins and a ketubah is a Rabbinic institution;
c) "This place is a beit hapras," for the ritual impurity associated with such a place is a Rabbinic safeguard;
d) "We would proceed until this point on the Sabbath," because the restriction of the Sabbath limits until only 2000 cubits is a Rabbinic restriction;
e) "So-and-so would leave school to immerse himself in a mikveh and eat terumah in the evening" or "he would receive a portion of terumah with us;"
f) "We would bring challah and presents of meat to so-and-so, the priest"; this applies when the presents were sent with the person himself;
g) "My father told me, 'This family is acceptable; this family is not acceptable";
h) "We ate from the fruit-barrel brought by the brothers of so-and-so to inform others that their brother, so-and-so, married a woman that was not appropriate for him.
All of the latter four points involve establishing a person as a priest to enable him to partake of terumah that is separated at present because of Rabbinic decree or to prevent him from partaking of it.
Halacha 4
The leniency granted in all these situations to accept the testimony of a person who reached majority with regard to what he knew when he was a minor is not granted when a gentile or a servant witnessed such matters and gave such testimony after he converted and was freed.
Halacha 5
If, before becoming a robber, a person knew of evidence concerning a colleague and recorded that evidence in a legal document and then became a robber, he cannot testify with regard to his signature. If, however, his signature to the legal document was validated in court before he became a robber, the legal document is acceptable.
Similarly, if a witness becomes a person's son-in-law, he may not testify concerning his signature on a legal document involving his father-in-law. Others, however, may testify concerning the son-in-law's signature. Even though the document is not validated by the court until after the witness becomes a person's son-in-law, it is acceptable. The disqualification of a witness because of a transgression is not the same as the disqualification of a witness because of a family connection, for a person disqualified because of a transgression is suspected of forging the document.
Halacha 6
When a legal document has only two witnesses signed upon it and they are related to each other or one of them is disqualified because of a transgression, even if the document was transferred in the presence of acceptable witnesses, it is worthless, like a shard, because of the invalid signatures inside it.
Halacha 7
The following rule applies when a person composes one legal document including testimony that he is granting all of his property to two people and the witnesses to the document are related to one of the recipients of the present, but not related to the other. The document is not acceptable, because it is one statement of testimony.
If, however, he writes in one legal document that he is giving this-and-this courtyard to Reuven and this-and-this field to Shimon, and the witnesses are related to one, but not to the other, the present given to the recipient to whom the witnesses are not related is binding. Even though the two statements are included in one legal document, they are considered as separate testimonies. To what can the matter be compared to a person who says: "Serve as witnesses that I gave Reuven this-and-this, that I gave Shimon this-and-this, and that I borrowed such-and-such from Levi." Although they were all included in the same legal document and there is only one person transferring the property, they are considered as three distinct statements.
____________________________
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters a Day: Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 10, Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 11, Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 12
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 10
Halacha 1
Just as it is permitted for a seller to take an order based on the market price; so, too, it is permitted to give a loan of produce without any conditions, to be returned without any conditions, without establishing a time when it must be returned once the market price has been established.
What is implied? If there was a fixed market price for wheat that was known by both the borrower and the lender, when the borrower borrows ten se'ah of wheat from a colleague, he is obligated to return ten se'ah, even though the price of wheat increased. The rationale is that when he borrowed the wheat from him, the market price was known. If he had wanted to, he could have purchased wheat and returned it, since a minimum term of the loan was not established.
Halacha 2
If the borrower possesses some of the type of produce that he seeks to borrow, it is permissible for him to borrow this produce without any conditions, to be returned without any conditions, without establishing a time when it is due. Even if he possesses only a se'ah, he may borrow many se'ah because of it. Even if he possesses only a drop of oil or wine, he may borrow several jugs of wine and oil because of it.
If he did not possess any of that type of produce and the market price was not established yet, or the borrower and the lender did not know the market price, it is forbidden to lend a se'ah of produce for a se'ah to be returned at a later date. Similarly, with regard to other types of produce, a person should not lend them out until he establishes a financial equivalent. The following rules apply when a person makes a loan of produce without establishing a financial equivalent, and it decreases in value. The borrower must return the measure or the weight of the fruit he borrowed. If they increased in value, the lender may take only the amount they were worth at the time of the loan.
Even if a person possesses that type of produce, or the market price had already been established, it is forbidden to make a loan of produce that must be repaid on a specific date. Instead, the loan must be made without any stipulation, and it can be repaid whenever the borrower desires to repay it.
Halacha 3
A person should not tell a colleague: "Lend me a kor of wheat and I will return a kor to you at the time when wheat is brought to the granaries." He may, however, tell him: "Lend me wheat until my son comes, or until I find the key to my storehouse."
Halacha 4
The following rules apply if a person lent out produce until a fixed date: If the produce diminished in value, the borrower should return the produce at the time set. If the produce increased in value, the borrower should pay him the money that it was worth at the time of the loan.
Halacha 5
A person may lend wheat to his sharecroppers to be used as seed, in return for wheat to be paid back after the harvest. This applies both before the sharecropper enters the field and after he entered the field.
When does this apply? In a place where it is customary that the sharecropper supplies the seed for the crops. For the owner of the field has the right to remove the sharecropper from the field whenever he does not supply it.
Different laws apply in places where it is customary for the owner of the field to provide the seed. If the sharecropper did not enter the field yet, it is permitted for the owner to lend wheat for wheat to be returned in the future, for he still has the prerogative of removing the sharecropper from the field. Thus, when the sharecropper entered the field, he entered with the intent of returning the wheat the owner lent him.
If, however, the loan was made after the sharecropper entered the field, since the owner can no longer have him removed, he is like any other person. It is forbidden to lend him wheat for seed in return for wheat to be paid back at a later date. He may, however, lend him wheat according to its market value if he does not make any stipulations.
Halacha 6
A loan may not be repaid with a loan of produce. To explain: A person owed a colleague money. The lender told the borrower: "Give me my money, because I want to purchase wheat with it."
The borrower responded: "Go out and establish the money I owe you as a debt of wheat according to the present market price."
If the borrower possesses an equivalent quantity of wheat, this is permitted. If, however, he does not have that type of produce, this is forbidden. For our Sages said that it is permitted to place an order based on a commodity's market price, even though the seller does not possess any of that commodity, only when the purchaser is paying money for the acquisition. It is, however, forbidden to transfer a debt of money into a debt of produce unless the borrower possesses the produce.
The concept can be extended when, in the above situation, the borrower did possess wheat and the debt was transferred into a debt of wheat. Similar rules apply if afterwards the lender comes and tells him: "Give me the wheat, because I want to sell it and use the money to purchase wine," and in response, the borrower tells him: "Go out and consider the debt as a debt of wine, according to the present market price of wine." If he possesses wine, it is permitted and it is considered as if he owes him wine. If he does not possess wine, it is forbidden.
If the borrower did not possess the commodity desired, but nevertheless, transgressed and transferred the debt into a debt of that commodity, he is not required to pay the debt in the commodity. Even though he did purchase the commodity afterwards, he should pay the lender the money he lent him.
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 11
Halacha 1
When a person lends money to a colleague in the presence of witnesses, or a borrower tells witnesses: "Serve as witnesses for me that I owe this person a maneh" or "You are my witnesses that I owe this person a maneh," the obligation established is referred to as a milveh b'al peh, "a loan supported by an oral commitment." Such a debt need not be repaid in the presence of witnesses.' Therefore, if the debtor claims: "I repaid the debt," he is required to take a sh'vuat hesset and is discharged.
When, by contrast, a person lends money to a colleague and has the debt supported by a promissory note, the debtor must repay him in the presence of witnesses. Therefore, if the debtor claims: "I paid this promissory note," his words are not accepted. Instead, we tell him: "Bring witnesses who testify that you paid or "Arise and pay the debt you owe him."
Therefore, when a person tells witnesses: "Serve as witnesses for me that I owe this person a maneh" they may not write down a record of their testimony and give it to the lender, unless the borrower tells them: "Write a promissory note, sign it and give it to the lender. The rationale is that their testimony, which is only oral, should not be given the legal power of a promissory note. Even when the borrower gives such instructions, they should consult with him after they have signed the promissory note. Only afterwards, may they give the promissory note to the lender in his hand.
If they performed a kinyan with the borrower affirming that he owes the lender a maneh, the witnesses may write a promissory note and give it to the lender, even though the borrower did not instruct them to do so. The rationale is that when a kinyan is performed without any further instructions, it is ready to be recorded in a legal document. There is no need to consult the borrower.
Halacha 2
When a borrower writes a document by himself and witnesses write testimony upon it and give it to the lender, it is an acceptable promissory note.
Similarly, should the borrower compose a promissory note - even when there are no witnesses who sign it - and give it to the lender in the presence of witnesses, the loan is considered to be backed by a promissory note, provided that it is written with a script that cannot be forged and that the witnesses in whose presence it was transferred read it.
There are Geonim who ruled that the borrower should tell the witnesses in whose presence the promissory note was transferred: "Sign the note or testify that it was transferred in your presence."
Halacha 3
If the lender produces a note written by the borrower , which states that he owes the lender money, but there are no witnesses who have signed it, it is considered as merely a loan supported by an oral commitment with regard to all matters. This applies even if the authenticity of his writing was verified.
Hence, if the borrower claims to have paid the debt, and the lender denies receiving payment, the borrower need only take a sh'vuat hesset before being dismissed. Nor may the lender use this note to expropriate property from the heirs, nor from the purchasers.
Halacha 4
Whenever a loan is supported by a promissory note, the lender may use this note to expropriate property from the heirs and from the purchasers, as will be explained. When, by contrast, a loan is merely supported by an oral commitment, the lender may expropriate payment from the heirs, but not from the purchasers. The rationale for this restriction is that such a loan does not become public knowledge. Therefore, the lender may not expropriate property because of such an obligation.
A loan supported by a promissory note, by contrast, does become public knowledge. Therefore, it may be used to expropriate property that was sold. The purchaser of such property caused himself a loss, because he did not inquire to the extent that he discovered that the property of the person he purchased it from was on lien because of the loan that person had taken. For according to Scriptural Law, all property belonging to a borrower is on lien to the loan.
Halacha 5
When a person sells his field in the presence of witnesses, and a creditor of the seller expropriates the field from the purchaser, the purchaser may expropriate the money due him from property that was on lien to the sale that had been sold to others, as will be explained. The rationale is that whenever a person makes a sale, it is done in public and becomes common knowledge.
Halacha 6
A loan that is supported by an oral commitment alone may be collected from heirs only in one of the following three instances:
a) the person who is liable admits his debt, and while mortally ill stated that he still owes so-and-so a debt;
b) the loan was given for a specific time, and the time for payment had not come; we operate under the presumption that a person will not pay a debt until it is due;
c) because of his failure to pay, the debtor was placed under a ban of ostracism until he would make restitution, and he died while under that ban.
In all these instances, the creditor may collect the debt from the heirs without having to take an oath. If, however, witnesses come and testify that the deceased owed a colleague a maneh, or that he borrowed money in their presence, the creditor may not collect anything from the heirs, because it is possible that the deceased repaid the loan. For a person who borrowed money from a colleague in the presence of witnesses does not have to repay him in the presence of witnesses. Similarly, if a person shows heirs a note from their father stating that he owes the claimant money, he may not collect anything because of it, as we have explained.
Halacha 7
The following rules apply when a borrower does not own movable property, but does own landed property. If the court is aware that he has deposited his money in the hands of other people, we compel him to sell the landed property and pay his creditor.
If this is not known to them, they issue a ban of ostracism against anyone who knows that the debtor possesses movable property and does not bring it to court. Afterwards, they take possession of property he owns that is of intermediate worth and expropriate it for the creditor, as will be explained.
When does the above apply? When payment is collected from the debtor himself. When, however, a person comes to collect payment from heirs -whether they are above or below majority - he does not have the right to collect from the movable property belonging to the estate even if it was entrusted or loaned to another person. For movable property inherited by heirs is not under lien according to Scriptural Law. '
Halacha 8
It is a mitzvah for the heirs to pay a debt left by their father from the movable property that he left. If an heir does not desire to make restitution, however, he is not compelled to do so. If the creditor seized property belonging to the debtor in the debtor's lifetime, he may collect his due from it.
If a creditor claims that he seized property during the debtor's lifetime, and the debtor's heir claims that the creditor seized the property after the debtor's death, the heir has the responsibility of proving his claim. Alternatively, the lender must take an oath that he was owed so-and-so much - he can claim up to the value of the property in his possession - and include in his oath that he seized the property in the debtor's lifetime.
If the property that he seized included promissory notes, and the lender claims that he is holding them as security for a debt and that he seized them during the debtor's lifetime, the lender must prove that he seized them during the debtor's lifetime. If he cannot bring proof, he should return them to the heirs. The difference is that with regard to promissory notes, he is not claiming the acquisition of the obligation itself, but rather proof that such an obligation exists.
Halacha 9
When heirs expropriated landed property because of a debt that others owed their father, a creditor of their father's can expropriate it from them. The rationale is that this land was in effect their father's.
Halacha 10
The above principles can be extended and applied in the following situation. Reuven sold a field to Shimon, accepting financial responsibility for the sale. Shimon did not pay immediately, but instead had Reuven consider the price of the field as a loan. Reuven died afterwards. Reuven's creditor then came to expropriate the field from Shimon. Instead of giving the creditor the field, Shimon appeased him with money, and he departed.
According to the law, Reuven's heirs may come and demand that Shimon pay the debt that he owed Reuven, for that loan is not on lien to Reuven's creditor.
Therefore, if Shimon is clever, he should give Reuven's heirs the land he purchased from them as payment for the debt that he accepted upon himself. He can then expropriate the property from them, because of the money that he gave to Reuven's creditor so that he would not expropriate it from him. This option is available because Reuven took financial responsibility for the field Shimon purchased.
Halacha 11
All of the Geonim have ordained, however, that a creditor may expropriate movable property from the heirs in payment for a debt. This judgment is enforced universally in all courts of law.
In the West, however, they would have a provision written in the promissory notes giving the creditor the right to collect the debt from either landed property or movable property in the creditor's lifetime or after his death. Thus, this provision gives the creditor more power to collect the debt than the ordinance of the Geonim.
This is a great safeguard, because it is possible that the borrower will not have known about ordinance, and thus the property of the heirs will be expropriated unjustly, because an ordinance of the later Sages does not have the legal power to be binding upon heirs.
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 12
Halacha 1
We do not expropriate payment from heirs unless they are past majority. When the heirs are below majority, by contrast, we do not collect a debt supported by a promissory note from them.
Halacha 2
Even if the promissory note contains all the stipulations in the world, the creditor may not use it to collect the debt until the heirs attain majority, lest they have proof that would disavow the promissory note.
Halacha 3
If the loan was a debt at interest owed to a gentile, we appoint a guardian, attach the property that the minor inherited, sell it, and pay the debt. The rationale is that the interest consumes the estate.
Similarly, if a woman demands payment of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah - whether she is the deceased's widow or divorcee - we appoint a guardian for the heirs and attach the deceased's property, so that the woman will gain favor in the eyes of others; i.e., so that she will have a minimum of property so that she will remarry. Hence, if the woman hurried and remarried and then came to demand payment of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from the estate acquired by the heirs, we do not pay heed to her until the heirs come of age." The rationale is that she is no longer entitled to receive her sustenance from the estate of the deceased, and she has remarried.
Halacha 4
Several of the Geonim have ruled that if the estate left to the heirs does not have more than the money due the woman because of her ketubah, or it contains less than that amount, we do not pay heed to her. For the heirs will have no benefit from paying the money due the woman because of her ketubah.
According to this opinion, our Sages said: "We attach the estate left to heirs to pay a woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from it," only so that the estate would not become devalued because of the need to pay for the widow's sustenance." And in this instance, since the woman takes everything, of what value is it to the heirs who are below majority that the property is attached? These views were not concerned with increasing the favor of the woman in the eyes of others.
Halacha 5
If the testator gave a command, saying: "Give a maneh to so-and-so," we pay heed to the claim, after appointing a guardian for the heirs to advance arguments on behalf of the interests of the heirs. If the testator says: "Give this maneh to so-and-so" or "... this field to so-and-so," we make the endowment; there is no need to appoint a guardian for the heirs.
Halacha 6
If it is discovered that land in the estate does not rightfully belong to the heirs, but instead, the plaintiff claims that the property was stolen by the person whose property they inherited, we pay heed to the claim and appoint a guardian to argue and enter into litigation on their behalf. If it is discovered that the property was in fact stolen, we return it to its owners.
Similarly, if a minor had his servants mount an attack and enter property belonging to a colleague and take control of it, we do not say that we will wait until he attains majority before the matter is adjudicated. Instead, we expropriate the property from him immediately. When he attains majority, if he has witnesses who support his claim, he should bring his witnesses.
Halacha 7
When land is presumed to be the property of minors, the land is not expropriated from them until they attain majority even in the following situation. Another person comes and claims that he had purchased that land from the person from whom they inherited it, and the purchaser has witnesses who will testify that he established his possession of this land and benefited from it for three years in the lifetime of the deceased. The rationale is that we accept the testimony of witnesses only when delivered in the presence of the litigant against whom they are testifying. And the minor is considered as if he is not present.
If, however, the plaintiff produced a deed of sale that states that the field is property that he purchased, he must validate the authenticity of the deed of sale. Afterwards, he may expropriate the property from the heirs after a guardian is appointed for them.
Halacha 8
When the court attaches property belonging to heirs for the purpose of selling it, they evaluate the property and then announce the sale for 30 consecutive days or on Mondays and Thursdays over the span of 60 consecutive days. Announcements are made in the morning and the evening, when workers enter the city, and when workers are sent out to their tasks. Whoever desires to purchase the property can bring his workers there to investigate it.
When an announcement is made, the borders of the field are clarified. They make known its yield, the evaluation given by the court and the reason it is being sold - to repay a creditor or to pay a woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. For there are some people who desire to repay a creditor and others who desire to pay a woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
Halacha 9
When an adrachta is written with regard to property belonging to heirs -whether they are above majority or below majority - the court must write: "And we identified the property as belonging to so-and-so, the deceased." If they did not write this, the adrachta is invalid, and a purchaser may not benefit from the proceeds of the property even though the announcements of the property's sale were completed.
Halacha 10
When a court sells property without announcing its sale beforehand, it is considered as if they erred in a matter explicitly stated in the Mishnah. The sale is nullified, and the property is sold again after announcements are made.
When a court sells property, the financial responsibility for it is incumbent on the heirs.
Halacha 11
When a court made announcements in the proper manner, investigated the matter thoroughly and carefully evaluated the property, their sale is binding even though they erred and sold property worth a maneh for 200, or property worth 200 for a maneh.
The following rules apply when, by contrast, the court was not careful in evaluating the property or did not compose a notice of evaluation, which details its assessment and the announcement of the sale of the property, and it erred in its appraisal. If they evaluated it at a sixth more than its value or at a sixth less than its value, the sale is nullified. If the error was less than a sixth, the sale is binding.
Similar concepts apply if a court sold landed property at a time when it was not necessary to announce its sale beforehand. If it erred and devalued the property by a sixth or overvalued it by a sixth, their sale is nullified. This applies even if it announced the sale beforehand. If their error was less than a sixth, its sale is binding even though it did not announce the sale. For an announcement was not necessary in these situations.
In which situations is it not necessary to make announcements before the sale of property? When land is sold to bury the deceased, for the sustenance of his wife and his daughters, or to pay the head-tax to the king, it is not necessary to announce the sale, because the matter is pressing.
Similar concepts apply if a court sold types of property whose sale need not be announced beforehand. If it erred and devalued the property by a sixth or overvalued it by a sixth, the sale is nullified. If the error was less than a sixth, the sale is binding.
These are the types of property whose sale need not be announced beforehand: servants, promissory notes and movable property; servants, because they may flee; promissory notes and movable property, because they may be stolen. Instead, these articles should be evaluated by the court and sold immediately. If the market place is close to the city, they should be taken to the market place and sold there.
____________________________
Hayom Yom:
Monday, 10 Cheshvan 5775 • 3 November 2014

"Today's Day"
Monday Cheshvan 10 5704
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayeira, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 55-59.
Tanya: But when the (p. 561) ...for the initiated. (p. 563).
The Alter Rebbe used to refer to Atzilut as "Above." They say that because of intense emotion, when writing the word he could get no further than "Atzi -."
____________________________
Daily Thought:
Hyper-Faith
We are more than believers. We are believers in believing. We know its power and have perfect faith it will work.
____________________________