Today's Laws & Customs:
• Today's 'Nasi': Ephraim
In today's "Nasi" reading (see "Nasi of the Day" in Nissan 1), we read of the gift bought by the nasi of the tribe of Ephraim, Elishama ben Amihud, for theinauguration of the Mishkan.
Text of today's Nasi in Hebrew and English.
• Sanctification of the Moon
Once a month, as the moon waxes in the sky, we recite a special blessing calledKiddush Levanah, "the sanctification of the moon," praising the Creator for His wondrous work we call astronomy.
Kiddush Levanah is recited after nightfall, usually on Saturday night. The blessing is concluded with songs and dancing, because our nation is likened to the moon—as it waxes and wanes, so have we throughout history. When we bless the moon, we renew our trust that very soon, the light of G‑d's presence will fill all the earth and our people will be redeemed from exile.
Though Kiddush Levanah can be recited as early as three days after the moon's rebirth, the kabbalah tells us it is best to wait a full week, till the seventh of the month. Once 15 days have passed, the moon begins to wane once more and the season for saying the blessing has passed.
Links:
Brief Guide to Kiddush Levanah: Thank G‑d for the Moon!
More articles on Kiddush Levanah from our knowledgebase.
Today in Jewish History:
• Jews Prepare to Cross into Canaan (1273 BCE)
The Jewish nation mourned for thirty days following the passing of Moses. (During this time, Joshua, the new leader of the Jewish nation, sent scouts to spy on the land of Canaan, see Jewish History for the 5th of Nissan).
On the 7th of Nissan, the first day after the mourning period came to an end, Joshua instructed the Jews to stock up on provisions and prepare themselves to cross the Jordan river and begin the conquest of the Promised Land. This was the first time Joshua addressed the nation, and they unconditionally accepted him as their new leader.
The actual crossing occurred on the 10th of Nissan.
Links:
Joshua 1
Joshua
Daily Quote:
A chassid creates an environment[Rabbi Sholom DovBer of Lubavitch (1860-1920)]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tzav, 6th Portion Leviticus 8:22-8:29 with Rashi
• Chapter 8
22And he brought near the second ram, the ram of the investitures, and Aaron and his sons leaned their hands [forcefully] upon the ram's head. כבוַיַּקְרֵב אֶת הָאַיִל הַשֵּׁנִי אֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים וַיִּסְמְכוּ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו אֶת יְדֵיהֶם עַל רֹאשׁ הָאָיִל:
the ram of the investitures: Heb. אֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים. [This expression is equivalent to] אֵיל הַשְּׁלָמִים, “the completion ram” [i.e., the word מִלֻּאִים does not mean “inauguration,” but rather,] it denotes שְׁלָמִים, for these rams filled (מְמַלְּאִים) and completed (מַשְׁלִימִים) the [status of the] kohanim in their kehunah. — [see Torat Kohanim 8:184] איל המלואים: איל השלמים, שמלואים לשון שלמים, שממלאים ומשלימים את הכהנים בכהונתם:
23And he slaughtered [it], and Moses took some of its blood, and placed it on the cartilage of Aaron's right ear, on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. כגוַיִּשְׁחָט | וַיִּקַּח משֶׁה מִדָּמוֹ וַיִּתֵּן עַל תְּנוּךְ אֹזֶן אַהֲרֹן הַיְמָנִית וְעַל בֹּהֶן יָדוֹ הַיְמָנִית וְעַל בֹּהֶן רַגְלוֹ הַיְמָנִית:
24And he brought Aaron's sons forward, and Moses placed some of the blood on the cartilage of their right ears, on the thumbs of their right hands, and on the big toes of their right feet, and Moses dashed the blood on the altar, around. כדוַיַּקְרֵב אֶת בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן וַיִּתֵּן משֶׁה מִן הַדָּם עַל תְּנוּךְ אָזְנָם הַיְמָנִית וְעַל בֹּהֶן יָדָם הַיְמָנִית וְעַל בֹּהֶן רַגְלָם הַיְמָנִית וַיִּזְרֹק משֶׁה אֶת הַדָּם עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב:
25And he took the fat, the tail, all the fat which was on the innards, the diaphragm of the liver, the two kidneys together with their fat and the right thigh. כהוַיִּקַּח אֶת הַחֵלֶב וְאֶת הָאַלְיָה וְאֶת כָּל הַחֵלֶב אֲשֶׁר עַל הַקֶּרֶב וְאֵת יֹתֶרֶת הַכָּבֵד וְאֶת שְׁתֵּי הַכְּלָיֹת וְאֶת חֶלְבְּהֶן וְאֵת שׁוֹק הַיָּמִין:
26And out of the basket of unleavened bread that was before the Lord, he took one loaf of unleavened bread, and one loaf of oily bread, and one wafer, and he placed them on top of the fats and the right thigh. כווּמִסַּל הַמַּצּוֹת אֲשֶׁר | לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה לָקַח חַלַּת מַצָּה אַחַת וְחַלַּת לֶחֶם שֶׁמֶן אַחַת וְרָקִיק אֶחָד וַיָּשֶׂם עַל הַחֲלָבִים וְעַל שׁוֹק הַיָּמִין:
and one loaf of oily bread: This refers to the רְבוּכָה, the loaves made by scalding [the dough] with boiling water, [and are called “oily bread,”] because a large quantity of oil was used for it, equal to that used for the loaves and the wafers combined. Thus it is explained in [Tractate] Men. (78a; 89a). וחלת לחם שמן: היא רבוכה, שהיה מרבה בה שמן כנגד החלות והרקיקין, כך מפורש במנחות (עח א):
27And then he placed it all on Aaron's palms and on his sons' palms, and he waved them as a waving before the Lord. כזוַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַכֹּל עַל כַּפֵּי אַהֲרֹן וְעַל כַּפֵּי בָנָיו וַיָּנֶף אֹתָם תְּנוּפָה לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה:
28And Moses took them from their hands and made them [go up in] smoke on the altar along with the burnt offering. They were investiture offerings, as a pleasing fragrance, a fire offering to the Lord. כחוַיִּקַּח משֶׁה אֹתָם מֵעַל כַּפֵּיהֶם וַיַּקְטֵר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה עַל הָעֹלָה מִלֻּאִים הֵם לְרֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ אִשֶּׁה הוּא לַיהֹוָה:
[And Moses…] caused them to [go up in] smoke on the altar: Moses performed the service throughout all the seven days of investitures, [dressed] in a white robe. — [A.Z. 34a] ויקטר המזבחה: משה שמש כל שבעת ימי המלואים בחלוק לבן:
along with the burnt-offering: after [he had burnt] the burnt-offering. With the exception of this one, we do not find anywhere [in Scripture], [a case of] a thigh of a peace-offering being offered up [on the altar]. על העלה: אחר העולה. ולא מצינו שוק של שלמים קרב בכל מקום חוץ מזה:
29And Moses took the breast and waved it as a waving before the Lord. It belonged to Moses as a portion from the ram of the investitures, as the Lord had commanded Moses. כטוַיִּקַּח משֶׁה אֶת הֶחָזֶה וַיְנִיפֵהוּ תְנוּפָה לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה מֵאֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים לְמשֶׁה הָיָה לְמָנָה כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶת משֶׁה:Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 39 - 43
• Chapter 39
David's prayer bewailing his suffering. But it is not suffering itself that pains him, rather he is saddened by its disturbing his Torah study. For man's days are few, "and if not now, when (will he study)?" for he may die, today or tomorrow. He therefore requests that his suffering be removed, to enable him to study Torah and acquire a place in the World to Come.
1. For the Conductor, for yedutun,1 a psalm by David.
2. I said that I would guard my ways from sinning with my tongue; I would guard my mouth with a muzzle, [even] while the wicked one is before me.
3. I became mute with stillness, I was silent [even] from the good, though my pain was crippling.
4. My heart grew hot within me, a fire blazed in my utterance, as I spoke with my tongue.
5. O Lord, let me know my end and what is the measure of my days, that I may know when I will cease.
6. Behold, like handbreadths You set my days; my lifetime is as naught before You. But all is futility, all mankind's existence, Selah.
7. Only in darkness does man walk, seeking only futility; he amasses riches and knows not who will reap them.
8. And now, what is my hope, my Lord? My longing is to You.
9. Rescue me from all my transgressions; do not make me the scorn of the degenerate.
10. I am mute, I do not open my mouth, for You have caused [my suffering].
11. Remove Your affliction from me; I am devastated by the attack of Your hand.
12. In reproach for sin You chastened man; like a moth, You wore away that which is precious to him. All mankind is nothing but futility, forever.
13. Hear my prayer, O Lord, listen to my cry; do not be silent to my tears, for I am a stranger with You, a sojourner like all my forefathers.
14. Turn from me, that I may recover my strength, before I depart and I am no more.
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.
Chapter 43
A significant prayer concerning the magnitude of the troubles we have suffered at the hands of the impious nations. May it be God's will to send Moshiach and Elijah the Prophet, who will lead us to the Holy Temple to offer sacrifices as in days of old.
1. Avenge me, O God, and champion my cause against an impious nation; rescue me from the man of deceit and iniquity.
2. For You are the God of my strength; why have You abandoned me? Why must I walk in gloom under the oppression of the enemy?
3. Send Your light and Your truth, they will guide me; they will bring me to Your holy mountain and to your sanctuaries.
4. Then I will come to the altar of God-to God, the joy of my delight-and praise You on the lyre, O God, my God.
5. 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: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 39• Lessons in Tanya
• Friday, Nissan 7, 5775 · March 27, 2015
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 39
In the previous chapter the Alter Rebbe explained why our Sages compare the performance of a mitzvah to a body, and one’s kavanah in performing the mitzvah to a soul.
He stated that kavanah can be classified into two categories, analogous to the two classes of creatures which possess a soul — animals and man.
The higher level of kavanah is that created by an intellectual appreciation of G‑dliness. Upon contemplating G‑d’s greatness, a love and fear of Him is born in one’s heart, which translates into a desire to cleave to Him. This desire in turn motivates one to fulfill the Torah and mitzvot, since they bind him to G‑d, and this motivation is the kavanah in his fulfillment of the Torah and mitzvot. Such kavanah, born of reason and produced by one’s own volition, is analogous to the soul of man, the intelligent being who determines his actions by choice.
The lower level of kavanah is that which stems from an arousal of the soul’s natural, instinctive love and fear of G‑d. Such kavanah is comparable to the soul of an animal, which is ruled by its natural instincts.
The Alter Rebbe now opens ch. 39 by stating that for this reason the angels, who fear and love G‑d by their very nature, are metaphorically called “animals”.
ומפני זה גם כן נקראים המלאכים בשם חיות ובהמות, כדכתיב: ופני אריה אל הימין וגו׳ ופני שור מהשמאל וגו׳
For this reason, too, the angels are called chayyot (“beasts”) and behemot(“animals”), as it is written,1 “and an angel with the face of a lion is to the rightof the divine chariot... and the face of an ox is on the left....”
לפי שאינם בעלי בחירה, ויראתם ואהבתם היא טבעית להם, כמו שכתוב ברעיא מהימנא, פרשת פינחס
For they have no freedom of choice between good and evil, as man has. And their fear and love [of G‑d] is natural to them; they need not create fear and love of G‑d through intellectual contemplation of G‑d’s greatness, as is written in Ra‘aya Mehemna (Parshat Pinchas). Because their fear and love of G‑d are natural and instinctive to them, they are compared to animals.
ולכן מעלת הצדיקים גדולה מהם, כי מדור נשמות הצדיקים הוא בעולם הבריאה, ומדור המלאכים בעולם היצירה
Therefore, tzaddikim are on a higher level than them (the angels):2 the abode of the souls of tzaddikim is in the World of Beriah (Creation), whereas the abode of the angels is in the World of Yetzirah (Formation).*
הגהה
והיינו בסתם מלאכים, אבל יש מלאכים עליונים בעולם הבריאה, שעבודתם בדחילו ורחימו שכליים
*NOTE
This is so [only] in the case of ordinary angels. There are, however, higher angels in the World of Beriah, whose service [of G‑d] is with intelligent fear and love.
כמו שכתוב ברעיא מהימנא שם, שיש שני מיני חיות הקדש, טבעיים ושכליים, וכמו שכתוב בע׳ חיים
It is written so in Ra‘aya Mehemna, ibid., that there are two kinds of holy chayyot,instinctive and intelligent (i.e., those whose love and fear are instinctive, and those who create love and fear intellectually), as is also written in Etz Chayim.
END OF NOTE
The abode of ordinary angels, however, is in the World of Yetzirah; and they are thus lower than the souls of the tzaddikim, whose abode is in Beriah. The Alter Rebbe now explains how intellectually created love and fear are related to Beriah, and instinctive love and fear toYetzirah.
והבדל שביניהם הוא
The difference between [Beriah and Yetzirah] is as follows:
כי בעולם היצירה, מאירות שם מדותיו של אין סוף ברוך הוא לבדן, שהן אהבתו ופחדו ויראתו כו׳
In Yetzirah, only the middot of the Blessed Ein Sof radiate (i.e., only the Sefirot ofChesed (kindness), Gevurah (Severity), etc.) — meaning the love of Him (corresponding toChesed), dread and fear of Him (corresponding to Gevurah), and so on (with the other four middot).
וכמו שכתוב בתקונים וע׳ חיים דשית ספירין מקננין ביצירה
For it is thus written (in Tikkunei Zohar and in Etz Chayim) that the six Sefirot(i.e., the six middot, from Chesed through Yesod) “nest” in (i.e., pervade) the World ofYetzirah.
The four partzufim (lit., “countenances”; i.e., configurations of Sefirot) of the Sefirot ofAtzilut (the World of Emanation) radiate in the four Worlds — Atzilut, Beriah, Yetzirah and (the World of Action, viz.,) Asiyah; one partzuf predominates in each World, representing the manifestation of G‑dliness in that World.
These partzufim are: (a) Chochmah (Wisdom); (b) Binah (Understanding); (c) Ze‘er Anpin(lit., “The Small Image”; i.e., the six middot); (d) Malchut (Sovereignty).
In Atzilut, Chochmah is the dominant partzuf. Atzilut is thus pervaded with an atmosphere of utter self-nullification before G‑d; for Chochmah, the dominant influence in that World, represents the perception that “Ein Sof is One alone, and there is naught besides Him” (as discussed in ch. 35).
In Beriah (also called the “World of the Throne”), Binah is the dominant partzuf. Beriah is therefore a World of intellect; the souls and angels of Beriah are distinguished by superior intellectual appreciation of G‑dliness.
Yetzirah is dominated by the six middot (which together constitute the partzuf of Ze‘er Anpin ). It is therefore a World of emotion; the creatures of Yetzirah serve G‑d with great emotional intensity.
Asiyah, the lowest World, is dominated by the partzuf of Malchut. G‑d’s attribute of Sovereignty evokes subservience in His subjects; therefore, in our service of G‑d in this World, the emphasis is on “accepting the yoke of heaven.”
To return to our subject: Middot are the dominant influence in Yetzirah.
ולכן זאת היא עבודת המלאכים, תמיד יומם ולילה לא ישקוטו, לעמוד ביראה ופחד וכו׳
Therefore, this is the service of the angels whose abode is in Yetzirah, as mentioned above, constantly, never ceasing day or night, to stand in fear and dread [of G‑d].
והיינו כל מחנה גבריאל, שמהשמאל
This refers to the entire host of [angels under] Gabriel, which is on the left.“Left” represents the middah of Gevurah, which evokes fear and awe. Therefore all these angels stand in constant fear of G‑d.
ועבודת מחנה מיכאל היא האהבה כו׳
The service of the host of [angels under] Michael, on the other hand, is love [of G‑d]; they stand in constant adoration of G‑dliness, corresponding to the middah of Chesed,and so on.
Thus, because middot constitute the dominant partzuf in Yetzirah, the service of the creatures of Yetzirah consists of emotion.
אבל בעולם הבריאה מאירות שם חכמתו ובינתו ודעתו של האין סוף ברוך הוא, שהן מקור המצות, ואם ושרש להן
But in the World of Beriah radiate the Chochmah, Binah and Daat of the Blessed Ein Sof (i.e., the upper three Sefirot — ChaBaD — of Atzilut), which are the source of middot, and their “mother” and root.
וכדאיתא בתקונים דאימא עילאה מקננא בתלת ספירן בכרסיא, שהוא עולם הבריאה
For it is written thus in Tikkunei Zohar, that Imma Ila‘ah (lit., “The Supernal Mother”; i.e., the Sefirah of Binah, described as “mother” of the World of Atzilut) “nests”(radiates) in “the Throne,” meaning the World of Beriah, with three Sefirot ofAtzilut: Chochmah, Binah and Daat.
ולכן הוא מדור נשמות הצדיקים, עובדי ה׳ בדחילו ורחימו הנמשכות מן הבינה ודעת דגדולת אין סוף ברוך הוא
Because these three Sefirot — ChaBaD — of the Ein Sof radiate in the World of Beriah, it is therefore the abode of the souls of those tzaddikim who serve G‑d with a fear and love that stem from understanding and knowledge of G‑d’s greatness,
שאהבה זו נקרא רעותא דלבא, כנ״ל
this love being called re‘uta delibba (lit., “the heart’s desire,” i.e., a desire created by intellect, as opposed to desire that transcends intellect), as mentioned above.
ומרעותא דלבא נעשה לבוש לנשמה בעולם הבריאה, שהוא גן עדן העליון, כדלקמן, וכמו שכתוב בזהר, ויקהל
From this re‘uta delibba a garment is formed for the soul in the World ofBeriah, which is the Higher Garden of Eden, as will be discussed further, and as is written in the Zohar, Parshat Vayakhel. The Lower Garden of Eden is in Yetzirah,and the Higher Garden of Eden in Beriah.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Yechezkel 1:10. |
| 2. | The divine service of angels, the Rebbe points out, would seemingly have no place inTanya, whose purpose is to serve as a guide to Beinonim — a guide to every Jew’s service of G‑d. The simple reason, explains the Rebbe, is to emphasize the lofty level of Torah and mitzvotthat are motivated by intelligent love and fear of G‑d. So sublime is this form of service, that it transcends the service of angels. Moreover: Since this is a book written for Beinonim, the Alter Rebbe seeks to make it perfectly clear that it is “very nigh” — because it is innate — to every Jew to perform Torah and mitzvot with love and fear of G‑d experienced in the heart. An individual who attains this degree of natural love and fear of G‑d but lacks intellectual love and fear, should not be misled into thinking that his love and fear lacks intensity and consequently, his resultant actions are deficient as well. Rather, this degree of love and fear, too, is of remarkable intensity. The Alter Rebbe makes his point by emphasizing that both the angels and the creatures of the Divine Chariot serve G‑d out of natural love and fear of Him. We are thus able to understand how great this manner of service truly it. It is deficient only in that it is an emotional form of service rather than an intellectual one. However, with regard to service of G‑d being “very nigh in your heart,” natural love and fear fulfill this function admirably. Thus, every Jew is quite capable of revealing his latent love and fear of G‑d so that it emerge forcefully, for his love and fear is similar to the love and fear experienced by the angels and other celestial beings. This ensures that a Jew’s actions, which result from his feelings toward G‑d, be performed in a forceful manner as well, so that each and every Jew perform Torah and mitzvot with the inner life and vitality that stems from his love and fear of G‑d. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:
Friday, Nissan 7, 5775 · March 27, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 306
Taking a Mother Bird together with Her Young
"Do not take the mother [bird] together with the children"—Deuteronomy 22:6.
When we encounter a bird's nest, it is forbidden to take the mother together with the chicks.
Taking a Mother Bird together with Her Young
Negative Commandment 306
Translated by Berel Bell
The 306th prohibition is that we are forbidden from taking the entire bird's nest — the mother and the chicks — when hunting.1
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,2 "You must not take the mother along with her young." This prohibition has a remedial positive commandment,3 "You must first chase away the mother." If one can no longer send her away and thereby fulfill the positive commandment — e.g. if the mother died before she could be sent away — the punishment is lashes.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the end of tractate Chulin.4
FOOTNOTES
1.According to Kapach, 5731, note 81, the Rambam means to exclude the case where one is merely passing by and doesn't need them for food. In such a case, one should leave them alone, as the Rambam writes in Guide to the Perplexed, Part 3, Chapter 48.
2.Deut. 22:6.
3.Ibid. 22:7. See P148.
4.138ff.
Milah - Chapter Two
Halacha 1
Circumcision may be performed by anyone. Even a person who is himself not circumcised, a slave, a woman, or a minor may perform the circumcision, if an adult male is not present. A gentile, however, should not be allowed to perform the circumcision at all. Nevertheless, if he does so, there is no need for a second circumcision.
Any utensil may be used for circumcision, even a flint, glass, or any article that cuts. One should not circumcise with the sharpened side of a reed, because of the danger involved. The optimum manner of performing the mitzvah is to use an iron utensil - either scissors or a knife. Throughout the Jewish community, it has become customary to use a knife.
Halacha 2
How is the circumcision performed? The foreskin that covers the crown of the penis is cut off until the entire crown is revealed. [This step is referred to asmilah.]
Afterwards, the soft membrane that is beneath the skin should be split along the mid-line with one's nails and peeled back to either side until the flesh of the crown is revealed. [This step is referred to as pri'ah.]
Afterwards, one should suck the place of the circumcision until all the blood in the further reaches is extracted, lest a dangerous situation arise. [This step is referred to as metzitzah.] Any [mohel] who does not perform metzitzah should be removed from his position. After one has performed metzitzah, one should apply a bandage, a compress, or the like.
Halacha 3
There are strands of flesh that disqualify a circumcision [if they are not removed], and strands of flesh that do not disqualify a circumcision.
What is implied? If, [after circumcision,] a portion of the foreskin is left that covers the majority of the crown of the penis' height,1 the child is considered to be uncircumcised, and this flesh is considered a tzitz that disqualifies the circumcision.2If only a small portion of flesh remains which does not cover the majority of the crown of the penis' height, it is considered to be a tzitz that does not disqualify the circumcision.3
Halacha 4
While the person performing the circumcision is involved in the operation, he should go back and remove both the tzitzim that disqualify the circumcision and the tzitzim that do not disqualify the circumcision.4 Once he has interrupted his activity, he must return and remove any tzitzim that disqualify the circumcision,5but he does not return to remove anytzitzim that do not disqualify the circumcision.6
When one performs a circumcision without performing pri'ah, it is considered as if the circumcision was not performed.7
Halacha 5
[The following ruling is given when] a child's flesh is soft and hangs loosely, or if he is very fat and, therefore, it appears that he is not circumcised. We should observe him when he has an erection: if he appears circumcised at that time, it is unnecessary to do anything more. One must, however, correct the flesh on the sides, because of the appearance it creates.
If, however, he does not appear to be circumcised when he has an erection, the loose hanging flesh on the sides should be cut off until the crown of the penis is revealed while it is erect.
This was ordained by the Rabbis. According to the Torah itself, even though he [appears] uncircumcised, since he was circumcised once, there is no obligation to circumcise him again.
Halacha 6
Anything that is necessary for the circumcision [itself] may be performed on the Sabbath. We may perform milah, pri'ah, and metzitzah, return and remove thetzitzim that disqualify the circumcision even though one has interrupted one's activity, return and remove the tzitzim that do not disqualify the circumcision if one has not interrupted one's activity, and bandage the circumcision afterwards. The preparation of articles that are necessary for the circumcision does not supersede the prohibitions against labor on the Sabbath.
What is implied? If we are unable to find a knife, a knife may not be made on the Sabbath, nor may we bring it from place to place. It is even forbidden to bring it from one courtyard to another courtyard in an alleyway if there is noeruv. Although the [mitzvah of] eruv is only Rabbinic in origin, it is not superseded by [the necessity] to bring a knife, since it was possible to bring the knife on Friday.
Halacha 7
Herbs may not be ground to [use for the compress], nor may water be heated [to wash the child], nor may a compress be prepared,8 nor may wine and oil be mixed [on the Sabbath itself].9
If cumin was not ground on Friday, one may chew it on the Sabbath10 and apply it [to the wound]. If one did not mix wine and oil together, they may each be applied individually. This is the general rule: Whatever can be performed on Friday does not supersede [the prohibitions against labor on] the Sabbath. Should one forget and not prepare the accessories necessary for the circumcision, the circumcision should be performed on the ninth day.
Halacha 8
If a child was circumcised on the Sabbath and, afterwards, the hot water was spilled or the herbs [for the compress] were scattered, one may do anything that is necessary for him on the Sabbath, because of the danger involved.
In a place where it is customary to wash a child, he may be washed on the Sabbath on the day of his circumcision, both before the circumcision and after the circumcision, and on the third day of his circumcision. The child's entire body may be washed as well as the place of the circumcision itself. [On the third day,] he may be washed with water that was heated on Friday or with water that was heated on the Sabbath itself, because the situation involves danger.
Halacha 9
If a knife was forgotten and not brought [to the place of the circumcision] on Friday, one may instruct a gentile to bring it on the Sabbath, provided he does not bring it through the public domain.
The general principle governing this matter is: It is permissible to tell a gentile to perform any activity that we are forbidden to perform as a sh'vut,11 so that we may perform a mitzvah at its appropriate time.12 When, however, an activity is prohibited because a forbidden labor is involved, we may not instruct a gentile to do it [for us] on the Sabbath.13
Halacha 10
[The preparation of] the accessories for circumcision - even when the circumcision is being performed at the appropriate time14 - does not supersede [the prohibitions against labor on] the holidays, because it is possible to complete them before the commencement of the holiday.15
[This ruling can be derived through the following] process of inference: If [the preparation of] the accessories for circumcision is not significant enough to supersede the Rabbinic prohibitions of sh'vut, why should they supersede a negative commandment of the Torah?16 [Nevertheless, there are certain greater leniencies on festivals:] One may grind herbs for [the compress], since these herbs are fit to be used in food.17 Similarly, oil and wine may be mixed together.18
Commentary Halacha 1
Circumcision may be performed by anyone. - Although a father is commanded to circumcise his son, if he is not present or cannot perform the mitzvah, it may be performed by another person.
Even a person who is himself not circumcised - This refers to a Jew who is not circumcised. The Kessef Mishneh explains that it refers to a person who was not circumcised because his brothers died because of circumcision. A Jew who intentionally fails to circumcise himself, however, should not be allowed to circumcise others. Rav Yosef Karo also quotes this ruling in the Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 264:1).
Note also the Ramah (ibid.), who states that an apostate should not be allowed to circumcise others.
a slave - Although a slave is not a full-fledged member of the Jewish community, he is obligated to perform certain mitzvot and is himself circumcised.
a woman - Avodah Zarah 27a allows a woman to perform a circumcision, because "a woman is considered as if she is circumcised." The matter is, however, one of debate, and other Sages do not allow a woman to perform a circumcision. Tosafot follow this view and their opinion is quoted by the Ramah (ibid.).
or a minor - This is allowed because a minor will ultimately be obligated to perform all the mitzvot and is circumcised himself.
may perform the circumcision, if an adult male is not present - i.e., if possible, an adult male should be charged with the fulfillment of this mitzvah.
A gentile, however, should not be allowed to perform the circumcision at all. - The Chatam Sofer (Yoreh De'ah, Responsum 132) explains that when a gentile performs a circumcision, the mitzvah is not performed at all...
Nevertheless, if he does so, there is no need for a second circumcision -because the deed has already been completed. (See also Sha'agat Aryeh, Responsum 54.)
This ruling revolves around the conception that there are two dimensions to circumcision:
a) the mitzvah of actually cutting off the foreskin;
b) the effect of that cutting, that the person is circumcised.
There are, however, other explanations of the Rambam's ruling. The Kessef Mishneh explains that the decision revolves upon whether or not circumcision must be carried out lishmah, for the sake of the fulfillment of the mitzvah.
The Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 264:1) rules that although a second circumcision is not required, blood should be extracted. This is the accepted practice today. Some authorities maintain that even the Rambam requires such a step.
Any utensil may be used for circumcision, even a flint - See Exodus 4:25, which relates that Tziporah (Moses' wife) performed a circumcision with such a utensil.
glass, or any article that cuts. One should not circumcise with the sharpened side of a reed, because of the danger involved. -Chulin16b explains that we are afraid that a splinter from the reed may damage the penis.
The optimum manner of performing the mitzvah is to use an iron utensil -The Targum Yonatan interprets Joshua 5:2 as an indication that iron was used for circumcision even at that early age. The Prishah (Yoreh De'ah 284:7) relates that this custom was instituted after Goliath's iron helmet split open before David's stone. God promised iron that, in recognition of its act on behalf of the Jews, they would use it for a positive purpose in future generations. The Mishnah (Shabbat 19:1) refers to the use of iron utensils for circumcision as an accepted custom.
either scissors or a knife. Throughout the Jewish community, it has become customary to use a knife. - See the Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat19:6.
Commentary Halacha 2
How is the circumcision performed? The foreskin that covers the crown of the penis is cut off until the entire crown is revealed. - i.e., all the tissue of the foreskin until its ridge must be removed.
[This step is referred to as milah.]
Afterwards - The pri'ah should be carried out after the circumcision itself. Today, there are some mohalim who insert a utensil and lift up the membrane before the circumcision, and then cut off the foreskin and the membrane together. Many contemporary authorities have criticized this approach.
the soft membrane that is beneath the skin should be split along the midline with one's nails - The Yalkut Shimoni, Vol. II, Note 723, states that nails were created for this purpose.
and peeled back to either side until the flesh of the crown is revealed. -Preferably, no portion of the foreskin or the membrane should remain. SeeChatam Sofer (Yoreh De'ah, Responsum13 248).
[This step is referred to as pri'ah.]
Afterwards, one should suck - Traditionally, the mohel sucks out the blood with his mouth. Nevertheless, in previous generations, the Rabbis did grant license to use a pipette because of the possibility that germs in the mohel's mouth might infect the child. Today, there are authorities who suggest the use of a pipette because of the danger that the mohel could contract AIDS.
the place of the circumcision until all the blood in the further reaches is extracted, lest a dangerous situation arise. - The Tiferet Yisrael (Shabbat19:2) relates that internal bleeding caused by the circumcision could cause the penis to swell, and applying suction to remove the blood averts that danger. The Tiferet Yisrael also writes that a danger exists that applying too strong a suction will rupture the blood vessels and cause excessive bleeding. Therefore, he recommends that one should apply gentle suction.
[This step is referred to as metzitzah.]
Any [mohel] who does not perform metzitzah should be removed from his position - because of the danger to which he exposes the children.
After one has performed metzitzah, one should apply a bandage, a compress, or the like - to stop the bleeding and assist the healing of the wound.
Commentary Halacha 5
[The following ruling is given when] - a circumcision was performed properly, but
a child's flesh is soft and hangs loosely, or if he is very fat and - there is flesh protruding over the crown of the penis and
therefore, it appears that he is not circumcised. - Were this condition to result from an improper circumcision, a second circumcision would be required. Since the circumcision was performed correctly, such measures are not necessary. Nevertheless,
We should observe him when he has an erection - when the penis is extended and its flesh taut
if he appears circumcised at that time - There is no need for the entire crown to be revealed; as long as one third of it is not covered by the flesh, it is acceptable (Terumat HaDeshen 264).
it is unnecessary to do anything more. One must, however, correct the flesh on the sides, because of the appearance it creates. - The flesh should be held back with bandages to prevent it from covering the crown. There is, however, no necessity for an additional operation even if these measures are not successful (Terumat HaDeshen, ibid.).
If, however, he does not appear to be circumcised when he has an erection - if more than two-thirds of the crown is covered
the loose hanging flesh on the sides should be cut off until the crown of the penis is revealed while it is erect. - The Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 264:6) explains that, in this instance - in contrast to the original circumcision - it is not necessary to reveal the entire crown; it is necessary only to reveal a minimal portion.
This - second operation
was ordained by the Rabbis. According to the Torah itself, even though he [appears] uncircumcised, since he was circumcised once - properly and all the flesh removed from the crown of the penis
there is no obligation to circumcise him again.
Commentary Halacha 6
Anything that is necessary for the circumcision [itself] may be performed on the Sabbath. - As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 9, when a circumcision is carried out on the eighth day of a child's life, it may be performed on the Sabbath, with the exception of several unique instances.
We may perform milah, pri'ah, and metzitzah - the three phases of the circumcision mentioned in Halachah 2.
return and remove the tzitzim that disqualify the circumcision even though one has interrupted one's activity - This is permitted because, until these strands of flesh are removed, the obligation to circumcise the child on the eighth day has not been fulfilled. (See Halachah 3 and commentary.) Hence, just as we are allowed to carry out the operation on the Sabbath at the outset, we are allowed to complete its performance by removing these strands of flesh.
return and remove the tzitzim that do not disqualify the circumcision if one has not interrupted one's activity - Even according to the opinion that allows one to return and remove these strands of flesh during the week, it is forbidden to do so on the Sabbath because the circumcision is acceptable. Hence, no further cutting is permitted because of the Sabbath laws.
and bandage the circumcision afterwards. - In general, medication may be applied on the Sabbath only when a danger to life is involved. The Sages considered circumcision to be in this category.
The preparation of articles that are necessary for the circumcision does not supersede the prohibitions against labor on the Sabbath. - The license the Torah grants for circumcision to be performed on the Sabbath applies only to the deed of circumcision, which is itself a mitzvah. All the preparatory stages that make circumcision possible must be performed beforehand, for they are not elements of the actual performance of the mitzvah (Kiryat Sefer).
What is implied? If we are unable to find a knife, a knife may not be made on the Sabbath, nor may we bring it from place to place. - i.e., from a public domain to a private domain
It is even forbidden to bring it from one courtyard to another courtyard in an alleyway if there is no eruv. - Here, there is no Torah prohibition involved. Nevertheless,
Although the [mitzvah of] eruv is only Rabbinic in origin, it is not superseded by [the necessity] to bring a knife -Pesachim 92a cites this as an example of the power of Rabbinic law. Although karet (the punishment for not fulfilling the mitzvah of circumcision) is involved, the Sages enforced their decree against carrying in such places and forbade bringing the knife.
since it was possible to bring the knife on Friday.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Rashi, Shabbat 137b, states that surely if the foreskin is left on the majority of the circumference of the penis' crown, it is unacceptable. When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah264:5) states that if the majority of the height of the crown is left covered in any one place, the circumcision is not acceptable. Thus, even a thin strand of skin that covers either the majority of the height or the majority of the circumference of the crown can disqualify the circumcision.
|
| 2. |
A second circumcision is required in such an instance, and a blessing is recited when performing it.
|
| 3. |
See the following halachah.
|
| 4. |
As mentioned in Halachah 6, this ruling applies even when the circumcision is being carried out on the Sabbath.
|
| 5. |
Since, as explained in the previous halachah, unless this flesh is removed, a second circumcision is necessary.
|
| 6. |
The Rambam's phraseology is somewhat problematic. The Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 264) explains that the Rambam's intent is that we are not required to remove this flesh. In contrast, the Sha'agat Aryeh (Responsum 50) interprets the Rambam as stating that, once the mohel has interrupted his activity, he is forbidden to return and cut off the remaining flesh. (The Sha'agat Aryeh himself questions the Rambam's decision. The Merkevet HaMishneh explains that since the circumcision is acceptable, it is forbidden to expose the child to further pain.)
The Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 264:5) rules that if the circumcision is performed during the week, one should remove this flesh. This ruling is followed throughout the Jewish community today.
|
| 7. |
The Babylonian Talmud relates that although pri'ah is not mentioned in the Torah, nor was Abraham commanded to carry out this activity, it is part of the oral tradition (halachah leMoshe miSinai), which may not be ignored (Shabbat 137b, Yevamot 71b). The Jerusalem Talmud (Yevamot 8:1) differs, and uses the principles of Biblical exegesis to derive the obligation of removing the membrane.
|
| 8. |
A compress that is prepared before the Sabbath may be applied on the Sabbath. It is, however, forbidden to prepare the compress on the Sabbath (see Hilchot Shabbat 23:11).
|
| 9. |
The mixture of wine and oil was applied to the wound to heal it.
|
| 10. |
According to Torah law, a labor is forbidden on the Sabbath only when it is performed in its usual fashion. In most cases, however, such activities are forbidden by the Rabbis. Nevertheless, in this instance, since the herbs are being prepared for a remedy and they are not being prepared in the normal manner, the Sages did not forbid their preparation (see Hilchot Shabbat 21:26).
|
| 11. |
In Hilchot Shabbat 21:1, the Rambam defines a sh'vut as follows:
[With regard to the Sabbath,] the Torah has told us, "You shall rest." This implies that we are obligated to rest from the performance of [certain] activities even though they are not included among the forbidden labors.
In Chapters 21 and 22 of those halachot, the Rambam explains the concept of sh'vut in detail.
|
| 12. |
In Hilchot Shabbat 6:9, the Rambam mentions this leniency with regard to bringing a shofar on Rosh HaShanah [i.e., in Jerusalem to be sounded in the Temple]. Although Tosafot (Gittin 8b) maintain that the leniency should not be extended beyond the scope of the mitzvah of circumcision, the Rambam's ruling is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 307:5).
|
| 13. |
For this reason, a gentile may not be instructed to make a knife or boil water for the circumcision. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 331:6.)
|
| 14. |
I.e., on the eighth day of a child's life.
|
| 15. |
Thus, making a knife is forbidden on a festival. Nevertheless, carrying a knife through the public domain and heating water are permitted on a festival.
|
| 16. |
There are certain leniencies regarding the performance of labor on festivals when compared to the performance of labor on the Sabbath. Nevertheless, the performance of labor on festivals is also considered a Torah prohibition. (See Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 1:1.)
|
| 17. |
On festivals, we are allowed to perform any labor that is connected with the preparation of food. Since these herbs could be used for food, we are allowed to prepare them for the circumcision as well.
|
| 18. |
In this instance, only a Rabbinic prohibition is involved, and it is waived because of the importance of circumcision (Ma'aseh Rokeach).
|
Shechitah - Chapter 9
Halacha 1
What is meant by the termpesukah?1 If the skin that covers the marrow2 of the spinal cord is severed, [the animal] is trefe. [This applies] provided the majority of the circumference [of the skin] is severed. If, however, the skin is split lengthwise or perforated, [the animal] is permitted. Similarly, if the backbone was broken, but the spinal cord was not split or the marrow within the cord was crushed and it would wobble, [the animal] is permitted because its skin is still intact.
Halacha 2
If the marrow decomposes and it can be poured like water or like molten wax to the extent that the spinal cord cannot stand when it is lifted up, [the animal] istrefe. If [the reason] it cannot stand is because of its weight, [the animal's] status is doubtful.3
Halacha 3
To where does the spinal cord extend? It begins behind the two glands at the beginning of the neck and extends until the second divider.4 Thus nothing remains after it except the third divider which is close to the beginning of the tail.
Halacha 4
Halacha 5
What is meant by the term keru'ah?7 [This concerns] the flesh which covers the majority of [the animal's] belly. If it is ripped open, the belly will [fall] out. If this flesh is ripped open, [the animal] is trefe. [This applies] even if the tear did not reach the belly itself to the extent that it is seen. Instead, since the majority of the thickness of this flesh was ripped open8 or removed, [the animal] is trefe.
What is the measure of the tear? It must be a handbreadth long. If the animal was small and the majority of the length9 of the flesh covering the belly was torn, it is trefe even though the tear is not a handbreadth long. For the majority [of its length] was torn.
Halacha 6
Halacha 7
When the skin of an animal was removed from it entirely - whether it was torn off by hand or [decomposed due to] sickness - the animal is trefe. This is calledgeludah. If a [portion of] skin as wide as a sela remained on the entire backbone, one as wide as a sela remained on the navel, and one as wide as asela remained on the tips of the limbs, [the animal] is permitted.13
Halacha 8
What is meant by the termnefulah?16 When an animal fell from a high place - at least ten handbreadths high17 - and one of its organs was crushed, it is trefe.
To what extent must it be crushed? It must be smashed and become ailing because of the fall to the extent that its form and appearance have been destroyed. Even though [the organ] is not perforated, cracked, or broken, [the animal] is trefe. Similarly, if one struck it with a stone or a staff and crushed one of its organs, it is trefe.18
To which organs are we referring? To those in the body's inner cavity.19
Halacha 9
If an animal walks after falling from a roof, we do not suspect [that it becametrefe].20 If it stood, but did not walk, we harbor such suspicions.21 If it jumped [from the roof] on its own [initiative], we do not harbor suspicions.22 If [a person] left his animal on the roof and found it on the ground, we do not suspect that it fell.23
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
When thieves steal lambs and throw them outside the corral, we do not suspect that their organs were crushed, because they throw them only with the intent that they will not be broken.27 If they returned them and threw them back to the corral because of fear,28 we suspect that they [may have become trefe].29 If they returned them out of a desire to repent, we do not harbor suspicions about [the lambs], because [the thieves] have the intent of returning them intact and therefore they will be careful when throwing them back.
Halacha 12
When an ox was forced to lie down for slaughter, we do not suspect [that its internal organs were crushed]. [This applies] even if it fell considerably to the extent that it made a great noise30 when it was fell. [The rationale is that] it implants its hoofs into it and strengthens itself until it falls to the ground.31
Halacha 13
If one struck an animal on its head and the blow extended toward its tail or [one hit it] on its tail and the blow extended toward its head - even if one struck it on the entire backbone - we do not suspect [that it became trefe]. If the staff had bulges at different points, we harbor suspicions [concerning the animal].32 If the head of the staff reached a portion of the backbone,33 we harbor suspicions. Similarly, we harbor suspicions if he struck the animal across the breadth of the backbone.34
Halacha 14
Halacha 15
Halacha 16
[The following rules apply if] it is knocked against water.40If it swam for its full height upriver, against the current, we do not suspect [that it became trefe].41 If, however, it swims downriver, with the current, we harbor suspicions, for perhaps the water is carrying it.42 If it advances toward straw or hay that is floating on the river, it is swimming on its own power and we do not harbor suspicions.
Halacha 17
In all situations where we said: "We do not harbor suspicions," it is permitted to slaughter [the animal] immediately and it is not necessary to check whether an organ was crushed. In all situations where we said: "We harbor suspicions," if one slaughters the animal, one must check its entire internal category from the head to the hind-thigh.43 If any of the factors that render an animal trefementioned above were discovered or one of the inner organs was crushed to the extent that its form was destroyed, [the animal] is trefe. Even if one of the organs whose removal does not render the animal trefe,44e.g., the spleen or the kidneys, is crushed, [the animal] is trefe. [There is] an exception, the uterus; if it is crushed, the animal is permitted.
Halacha 18
[The gullet and the windpipe] do not require examination in these situations, for a fall will not crush them.
Halacha 19
Halacha 20
Halacha 21
When the majority of [the windpipe and the gullet were separated50 and] hang loosely, [the animal] is trefe. [This applies] even if [this condition occurs] due to reasons other than a fall.51 Similarly, if they became folded over,52 [the animal is unacceptable,] because they are no longer fit for ritual slaughter.53 If, by contrast, [even though] the majority54 of the throat55 was set loose from the jaw-bone, [the animal] is permitted, for the throat area is not fit for ritual slaughter, as we explained.56
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Pesukah is also one of the eight categories of trefot mentioned in Chapter 5, Halachah 2. The term literally means "severed."
|
| 2. |
We are using this term to translate the Hebrew term moach. It is a loose term that means the material inside a bone. Chullin 45b states that this marrow is no of significance with regard to the category of pesukah. Therefore the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 32:1) rules that if the skin is severed, even if the marrow is entirely intact, the animal is trefe.
|
| 3. |
And hence, forbidden. This ruling is granted because this question is left unresolved by Chullin45b. The Kessef Mishneh quotes Rashi who explains that this is speaking about a situation where the spine has become thick and heavy, but has not become soft inside. The question is whether this state results from sickness or not.
|
| 4. |
See the following halachah for a definition of this term.
|
| 5. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 32:5) interprets this as meaning the place where the wings are attached to the body. The Rama follows the opinion of Tosafot who state that the term refers to the place where the wings lie on the body, a point somewhat lower on the fowl's back.
|
| 6. |
For these portions are not fundamental for the body's functioning.
|
| 7. |
Keru'ah is also one of the eight categories of trefot mentioned in Chapter 5, Halachah 2. The term literally means "ripped apart."
|
| 8. |
I.e., but some flesh remained. The animal is deemed trefe, because in such a condition, ultimately, the entire flesh will tear open.
The Kessef Mishneh notes that many others authorities interpret Chullin 50b, the Rambam's source, as implying that if the cut extends over the majority of the animal's belly, the animal istrefe. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro quotes the Rashba as explaining that the Rambam does not accept this approach because if so, there would be no difference between the categories of pesukah and keru'ah. The Rashba himself does not require such a distinction and instead, maintains that these categories overlap. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 48:3), he quotes the Rambam's view. The Turei Zahav 48:5 and the Siftei Cohen 48:4 mention the other positions.
|
| 9. |
The dissenting perspectives also maintain that the same ruling applies with regard to the majority of the breadth of the belly (Siftei Cohen 48:6).
|
| 10. |
The previous halachah was speaking about a slit where the flesh was not necessarily cut away. This halachah speaks about a situation where a portion of flesh was removed (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 11. |
A coin of the Talmudic era with a diameter that is a third of a handbreadth, i.e., 2.6 cm. According to Shiurei Torah.
|
| 12. |
I.e., a sela is a little more than a third of a handbreadth. Hence the circumference of the cut is a handbreadth.
|
| 13. |
Chullin 55b mentions a tradition that maintains that if an animal's entire skin is removed except for a portion the size of a sela, the animal is acceptable. [For from this portion, the entire skin will be regenerated (Rashi).] The Talmud continues mentioning three views, concerning where the skin must remain. Since the matter remains unresolved and we do not know which of these views should be followed, the Rambam rules that all of the different views must be respected and a portion of skin the size of a sela must remain in each place (Kessef Mishneh).
(Significantly, in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Chullin 3:2), the Rambam mentions only the view that requires skin on the backbone and not the other opinions.)
|
| 14. |
This question is left unresolved by Chullin, loc. cit. Hence there is a doubt concerning the ruling.
|
| 15. |
Many authorities question the Rambam's ruling. Seemingly, if the question was left unresolved by the Talmud, on what basis does the Rambam permit it?
In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro offers two explanations for the Rambam's ruling:
a) As the Rambam states in Chapter 5, Halachah 3, since all the categories of trefot aside from aderusah are not mentioned explicitly in the Torah, we rule leniently concerning doubts.
b) Since the skin was removed from only one of three places mentioned, there is a multiple doubt (sefek s'feikah) involved. Perhaps the place from which the skin was removed was in fact not the vital area (for the halachah could follow one of the other views). Even if it was the vital area, perhaps the fact that the skin on the remainder of the body is intact is enough for the animal to be permitted.
In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 59:1), Rav Yosef Caro quotes the Rambam's ruling. The Siftei Cohen 59:2 mentions the opinions that differ with the Rambam. The Rama adds that if the skin is removed from all three places, the animal is trefe.
|
| 16. |
Nefulah is also one of the eight categories of trefot mentioned in Chapter 5, Halachah 2. The term literally means "one which fell."
|
| 17. |
In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro quotes Chullin 50b which states that this refers to a height of four handbreadths above the ground, for there are six handbreadths from the bottom of an animal's belly until the ground. He also cites this view in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 58:1).
Moreover, in both those sources, Rav Yosef Caro also quotes views that state that this law applies only when the animal fell on its own or knew that it was being pushed by others. If, however, it was pushed suddenly by others, it is considered trefe even if it fell from a lesser height.
|
| 18. |
In this instance, the distance of ten handbreadths is not significant. Instead, if it was thrown with enough force to cause mortal damage, it can cause the animal to be rendered trefe.
|
| 19. |
Therefore all of those organs must be inspected (Chullin 51a). The Ra'avad states that every organ that would render the animal trefe if crushed must be inspected.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 58:6) writes that in the present era, we are not knowledgeable with regard to conducting these examinations and an animal that falls should be permitted only if it walks, as stated in the next halachah.
|
| 20. |
Walking is adequate proof that the animal was not injured by the fall to the extent that it would no longer survive. Since it walks, we assume that it is healthy and do not require an internal examination, as stated in Halachah 17. The Kessef Mishneh emphasizes that this applies only when the animal stood up on its own and then walk. If it was lifted up by others, we harbor suspicions. Similarly, he quotes authorities who maintain that it must walk in an ordinary manner. If it limps as it proceeds, an inspection is required. See Rama (Yoreh De'ah 58:6).
In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 58:5), Rav Yosef Caro quotes the opinion of the Rashba who writes that even if an obvious change was seen in its organs, as long as it was able to stand and walk, we do not suspect that it has become trefe.
|
| 21. |
And require an inspection.
|
| 22. |
For we assume that it prepared itself and jumped in a manner that would not cause injury. TheShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 58:11) states that this applies even if the animal is not able to walk afterwards.
|
| 23. |
We assume that it jumped intentionally, as explained above.
|
| 24. |
We do not assume that their inner organs were crushed, because this is ordinary behavior.
|
| 25. |
Chullin 51a states that we harbor suspicions, not because of the butting, but because the animal fell and we fear that it was injured by the fall.
|
| 26. |
I.e., if we do not know that it fell.
|
| 27. |
Otherwise, the stolen animal will not be of any benefit to them.
|
| 28. |
I.e., the fear of being caught.
|
| 29. |
For the thieves will not show any care for the animal while throwing it back into the corral.
|
| 30. |
Rashi (Chullin, loc. cit.) interprets this as meaning that the ox bellowed, but this does not appear to be the Rambam's understanding.
|
| 31. |
I.e., it is aware that they are trying to push it to the ground and it fights against them, thus lessening the impact of its fall. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 58:10) writes that if the ox's feet are tied when it is pushed to the ground, we do suspect that it may have become trefe. For when its feet are tied, it cannot control its fall.
|
| 32. |
For the blows dealt by the bulges will be far more severe. Hence the backbone must be inspected to see that it is intact. See Turei Zahav 32:4.
|
| 33. |
In the previous clauses, the head of the staff did not carry with the brunt of the blow, because the lower portion of the staff struck the animal's body first. Here we are speaking about a situation where the first and primary focus of the blow is delivered to the backbone by the top of the staff. This is a far more dangerous situation.
|
| 34. |
For the entire blow is focused on one point of the spinal cord.
|
| 35. |
Or conversely, if a firm article like a stone falls upon it [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 58:2)].
|
| 36. |
I.e., a mound of loose straw. Straw that has been bundled, by contrast, is considered as a firm article (Chullin 51b).
|
| 37. |
One of the techniques with which hunters would trap wild fowl would be to set traps for them which would glue their wings to boards or other articles that prevented them from flying.
|
| 38. |
For by flapping the other wing, it will slow its fall and lessen the impact.
|
| 39. |
For there is nothing to soften the blow.
|
| 40. |
It was snared and fell unto a river.
|
| 41. |
For this exertion indicates that the animal is fundamentally healthy. It is equivalent to - or exceeds - the walking mentioned in Halachah 9.
|
| 42. |
In a still body of water that has no current, any swimming is a sign of health (see Siftei Cohen58:10).
|
| 43. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 58:3) quotes the Rambam's ruling. As mentioned above, the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 58:6) states that in the present age, we are not knowledgeable with regard to conducting these examinations and an animal is permitted only if it walks after falling or receiving a blow.
|
| 44. |
The Ra'avad differs and maintains that there is an unresolved doubt with regard to the ruling in this instance. As mentioned, the Shulchan Aruch follows the Rambam's position.
The Kessef Mishneh explains the Rambam's ruling as follows: Since Chullin 51a states that if the uterus is crushed, it is not significant, we conclude that the crushing of all other internal organs is significant. Otherwise, it would not be necessary to single out the uterus. Moreover, he explains that crushing an organ can be more painful and more injurious to an animal than removing it.
|
| 45. |
I.e., if it stands - even if it does not walk - it can be slaughtered immediately and deemed acceptable through an examination, as above.
|
| 46. |
For sometimes the effects of a fall are not immediately evident. It is possible that an animal would be inspected and no difficulty found, but in truth, the effects of the fall would be enough to kill it. To reduce the possibility of such an occurrence, Chullin 51b requires waiting an entire day before slaughtering the animal. See Kessef Mishneh.
|
| 47. |
See Halachah 17.
|
| 48. |
Chullin 56a describes such a situation with regard to an animal. The Rambam speaks of a fowl instead, for this is a more commonplace possibility.
|
| 49. |
Lest its organs have been crushed.
|
| 50. |
This addition is made on the basis of the Kessef Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah33:10).
|
| 51. |
Nevertheless, the Rambam mentions this condition here in connection with an animal that has fallen, because this is the most frequent situation in which this condition will occur.
|
| 52. |
They came loose from the place where they are attached within the throat area. See Chapter 3, Halachah 14, and Chapter 8, Halachah 23.
|
| 53. |
The Kessef Mishneh states that the Rambam rules that the animal is unacceptable, not because it would die because of this condition, but because it is impossible to slaughter it correctly.
|
| 54. |
If, however, the entire throat became loose from the jaw, the animal is trefe. For the gullet and the windpipe themselves, however, must remain taut and this is impossible if the entire throat has become loose (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 55. |
I.e., the area referred to by the halachic term "the entrance to the gullet."
|
| 56. |
Chapter 1, Halachah 6.
|
Shechitah - Chapter 10
Halacha 1
What is meant by the termsheburah?1 That the majority of [an animal's] ribs are broken. An animal has eleven ribs2 on either side of its body. If six were broken on one side and six on the other, or eleven were broken on one side and one on the other, [the animal] is trefe. [This applies] provided it is the half that faces the backbone3 and not the half that faces the chest.
Halacha 2
When six [ribs] were broken on either side, [the animal] is trefe [only] when they are large ribs that have marrow. If not, even though they represent the majority of the animal's ribs and they were broken facing the backbone, [the animal] is permitted.
Similarly, if the majority of the ribs were uprooted, [the animal] is trefe. [Moreover,] if even one rib is uprooted together with half of the vertebra in which it is lodged, it is trefe. Similarly, if even one vertebra was uprooted from the backbone, it is trefe, even if was a vertebra that is below the flanks where there are no ribs.
Halacha 3
[The following rules apply when] the thigh of an animal has slipped from its place and has left its socket. If its sinews, i.e., the peg-like projections from the bones of the socket which extend toward the bone that enters the socket4 and holds it have degenerated, [the animal] is trefe.5 If they have not degenerated, it is permitted.6
Halacha 4
Similarly, with regard to a fowl, if its hip is dislocated,7 it is trefe. If its wing is dislocated from its socket, we fear that it perforated the lung.8 Therefore we conduct an examination.9 Afterwards, it may be eaten. When the foreleg of an animal is dislocated from its socket, it is permitted. We do not harbor any suspicions.10
Halacha 5
When a portion of the skull of a domesticated animal or wild beast the size of asela11 was removed, [the animal] is trefe even though the membrane was not perforated. If a skull was perforated by a number of small holes that [detract from the skull's] substance, they are all added together [to see if their combined size equals] a sela.
Halacha 6
Similarly, if the majority of the height12 and the majority of the circumference of a skull was crushed, [the animal] is trefe, even though its membrane is intact and it is not lacking any substance. If the majority of its height was crushed, but the majority of its circumference was intact or the majority of its circumference was crushed, but the majority of its height was intact, there is an unresolved doubt whether [the animal] is trefe or not.13 It appears to me that we forbid it.14
Halacha 7
When the bones of the skull of a water fowl, e.g., a goose, is perforated,15 [the fowl] is trefe even though the membrane has not been perforated. [The rationale is that] the membrane is soft.16
[The following procedure should be adhered to when] a weasel struck17 a land fowl on the head or it was struck by a stone or a piece of wood. One places his hand next to the hole and applies pressure or he inserts his hand into the fowl's mouth and applies pressure upward. If [the fowl's] brain emerged from the hole, it can be concluded that the membrane has been perforated and it is trefe. If not, it is permitted.18
Halacha 8
When an animal's blood pressure causes it to choke,19 it was affected by a black gall bladder secretion20 or a white gall bladder secretion,21 it ate a poison which kills animals, or drank fowl water, it is permitted.22 If it ate a poison that could kill a human or it was bitten by a snake or the like, it is permitted with regard to the laws of trefe, but it is forbidden because of the mortal danger [partaking of it could cause].23
Halacha 9
Thus the total number of conditions that cause a domesticated animal or a wild beast to be deemed trefe when singled out are seventy.24 They are: 1) an animal that has been attacked;24
2) the perforation of the entrance to the gullet;25
3) the perforation of the membrane of the brain;26
4) the degeneration of the brain itself;27
5) the perforation of the heart itself to its cavities;28
6) the perforation of the arteries leading from the heart;29
7) the perforation of the gall-bladder;30
8) the perforation of the arteries of the liver;31
9) the perforation of the maw;32
10) the perforation of the stomach;33
11) the perforation of the abdomen;34
12) the perforation of the gut;35
13) the perforation of the digestive organs;36
14) the digestive organs protruded outside the animal's body and became overturned;37
15) the perforation of the thick portion of the spleen;38
16) a lack of a gall-bladder;39
17) being born with two gall-bladders;40
18) a lack of a maw;
19) being born with two maws;
20) a lack of a stomach;
21) being born with two stomachs;
22) a lack of an abdomen
23) being born with abdomens;
24) a lack of a gut;
25) being born with two guts;
26) a lack of one of the digestive organs;
27) being born with an extra digestive organ;
28) the perforation of the lung;41
29) the perforation of the windpipe in a place where it is not fit for ritual slaughter;42
30) the perforation of the bronchioles of the lungs, even if it is covered by another one;43
31) a portion of the lungs has become closed;44
32) the degeneration of one of the bronchioles of the lungs;45
33) the discovery of putrid fluid in the lungs;46
34) the discovery of putrid liquid in the lungs;47
35) the discovery of murky liquid in [the lungs] even if it has not become putrid;48
36)the degeneration of the lung;49
37) a change in the lung's appearance;50
38) the reversal of the gullet's appearance;51
39) a lack of one of the required number of lobes of the lung;52
40) a change in the order of the lobes;53
41) the addition of a lobe on the back [of the lung];54
42) the attachment of one lobe to another out of the ordinary order;55
43) the discovery of a lung without division into lobes:56
44) the lack of a portion of the lung;57
45) a portion of the body of the lung is dried out;58
46) the discovery of the lung in an inflated state;59
47) a lung became shriveled because of fear of humans;60
48) the lack of a hindleg; whether from birth or because it was cut off;61
49) the possession of an extra leg;62
50) the removal of the junction of the sinews;63
51) the removal of the liver;64
52) the removal of the upper jaw-bone;65
53) a kidney that became extremely undersized;66
54) a kidney that has become afflicted;67
55) the discovery of fluid in the kidney;68
56) the discovery of murky liquid in the kidney, even if it is not putrid;69
57) the discovery of putrid liquid in the kidney;70
58) the severance of the spinal cord;71
59) the softening and degeneration of the spinal cord;72
60) the ripping open of the majority of the flesh that covers the belly;73
61) the removal of [an animal's] skin;74
62) the crushing of [an animal's] organs due to a fall;75
63) the slippage of the gullet and windpipe;76
64) the breaking of the majority of [the animal's] ribs;77
65) the uprooting of the majority of the ribs;78
66) the uprooting of one rib together with its vertebra;79
67) the uprooting of one vertebra; 80
68) the slippage of the thigh from its socket;81
69) the lack of a portion of the skull the size of a sela;82
70) the crushing and smashing of the majority of the skull;83
10 These seventy conditions of infirmity which cause a domesticated animal or a wild beast to be forbidden as a trefe were each explained together with all the particular laws. All of the possible parallels that can be found with regard to a fowl in the organs that are common to an animal and a fowl are the same with regard to an animal and a fowl. The only exceptions are the conditions that render an animal trefe in the kidneys, the spleen, and the lobes of the lung. For a fowl does not have a division of lobes like an animal does. If there is such a division, there is no fixed number. The spleen of a fowl is round like a grape and is not the same shape as that of an animal.84 [The conditions of infirmity] concerning the kidneys and the spleen [that render] an animal trefe were not mentioned in order to find parallels with regard to a fowl. Therefore no set measure was given concerning a fowl with regard to a kidney whose size was reduced. Similar concepts apply in other analogous situations.85
Halacha 11
There are two conditions that render a fowl trefe in addition to those that render an animal [trefe] despite the fact that [an animal] also possesses these organs. They are: a) a fowl whose digestive organs have changed color because of [exposure to] fire;86
b) a water fowl whose skull bone has been perforated.87
Halacha 12
One should not add to these conditions that render an animal trefe at all.88 For any condition that occurs with regard to a domesticated animal, wild beast, or fowl aside from those listed by the Sages of the early generations and which were agreed upon by the courts of Israel can possibly live. [This applies] even if it is known to us according to medical wisdom that ultimately it will not live.89
Halacha 13
Similarly, with regard to those [conditions] which [our Sages] listed as [causing an animal to be] deemed trefe even though it appears from the medical knowledge we possess that some of them will not kill and it is possible for the animal to live - we follow only what the Torah says,90 as [Deuteronomy 17:11] states: "According to the Torah in which they will instruct you."91
Halacha 14
Whenever a butcher is knowledgeable about these [conditions that cause an animal to be deemed] trefe and he has established a reputation for observance, he may slaughter [animals], inspect them himself, and sell them without any suspicion. [The rationale is the word of] one witness is accepted with regard to the Torah's prohibition whether his testimony will lead to benefit for him or not.
We already explained92 that we do not purchase meat from a butcher who slaughters and inspects [the animal] himself in the Diaspora or [even] in Eretz Yisrael in the present age unless he established a reputation as an expert. If he sold an animal that was trefe, we place him under a ban of ostracism and remove him from his position.93 He cannot reestablish his credibility until he goes to a place where his identity is not recognized and he returns a lost article that is very valuable or [slaughters an animal] for himself and declares it trefeeven though it involves a significant loss.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
Sheburah is also one of the eight categories of trefot mentioned in Chapter 5, Halachah 2. The term literally means "broken."
|
| 2. |
An animal also has several smaller ribs, but they're being broken does not impair the animal's functioning.
|
| 3. |
I.e., the portion close to the backbone. If the ribs are broken there, the animal's functioning can be impaired. If they are broken closer to the chest, the impairment will be less severe.
|
| 4. |
Speaking in analogy, the Rambam refers to this as "the male" bone.
|
| 5. |
The Ra'avad states that if the thigh is dislocated from its upper socket, the animal is trefe even if the sinews have not degenerated. According to the Ra'avad, the law stated by the Rambam applies when the thigh is dislocated from its lower socket. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 55:2) follows the Rambam's perspective. The Rama mentions that there are opinions that maintain that in the present age, we are not knowledgeable with regard to the determination of whether the sinews have degenerated and we should rule an animal trefe whenever its thigh has dislocated. He advises following these views whenever there is not a significant loss involved.
|
| 6. |
Similarly, even if they have degenerated, but the bone has not slipped out of its socket, the animal is permitted. As long as the bone is in its socket, we assume that the sinews will regenerate [Maggid Mishneh; Rama (Yoreh De'ah 55:2)].
|
| 7. |
And the sinews have degenerated (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 8. |
I.e., the dislocation of the wing is not sufficient to render the fowl trefe in its own right. Nevertheless, we fear that perhaps it perforated the lung and hence require an examination.
|
| 9. |
And inflate the lung [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 53:3)].
|
| 10. |
For the shoulder socket is substantial and will prevent the arm bone from perforating the lung (Kessef Mishneh). The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 52:1) quotes views that rule that an animal is trefe if its arm is broken close to its body and there are signs of internal bleeding.
|
| 11. |
As mentioned above, a sela is one third of a handbreadth wide. Thus its diameter is 2.6 cm according to Shiurei Torah and 3.2 cm according to Chazon Ish.
|
| 12. |
I.e., the majority of the portion of the skull from the eyes up (Rashi, Chullin 52b).
|
| 13. |
This question is left unresolved by Chullin, loc. cit.
|
| 14. |
The Kessef Mishneh clarifies why it is necessary for the Rambam to make this statement, seemingly, it is obvious. Whenever there is an unresolved question concerning a Torah prohibition, we rule stringently. He explains that it is possible to interpret the Talmud's question is implying that in one circumstance, when the majority of the skull's height alone is crushed or the majority of its circumference alone is crushed, the animal is kosher, but we are unsure of which one. Therefore the Rambam must clarify that because of the doubt, both situations are forbidden.
|
| 15. |
Even the smallest perforation can render the fowl trefe (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 16. |
If it is not protected by the skull, it will most likely be perforated in the near future (Rashi, Chullin56a).
|
| 17. |
The Kessef Mishneh explains that we are speaking about a situation where the weasel bit the fowl on the skull. If it struck it with its paws, the fowl is trefe, because it is a derusah, as stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 6.
|
| 18. |
According to the Rambam, both of these procedures are equally effective (Kessef Mishneh). The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 30:2) writes that in the present age, we are not knowledgeable with regard to this process of examination and should rule that a fowl is trefe whenever its skull is perforated.
|
| 19. |
Our translation is based on Rav Kapach's translation of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 3:5).
|
| 20. |
Here also our translation follows the above source. Rav Kapach draws support for his interpretation from Psalms 74:1.
|
| 21. |
Which when is not released according to the proper measure causes the animal to become very heavy and to have difficulty moving (ibid.). It must be emphasized that other commentaries offer different interpretations of all three of these conditions.
|
| 22. |
In this context, the commentaries have cited Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 4:11: "When an animal is sick because it is weakened and is on the verge of death, it is permitted, because it did not suffer a wound in any one of the limbs and organs that will cause it to die. For the Torah forbade only those situations resembling an animal mortally wounded by a preying wild beast. In that situation, the animal wounded it with a blow that caused it to die."
|
| 23. |
For the poison or the venom could kill the person who partakes of the animal's meat. See Hilchot Rotzeach UShemirat Nefesh 12:1. 24. The Kessef Mishneh explains the basis for the Rambam's reckoning: Whenever a condition that causes an animal to be deemed trefe is mentioned explicitly by the Talmud, it is considered as being in a separate category even though it is a derivative of another category. For example, the degeneration of the bronchioles is considered a separate category even though it is a derivative of the category of the perforation of the bronchioles.
|
| 24. |
See Chapter 5, Halachah 4 ff.
|
| 25. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 2.
|
| 26. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 3.
|
| 27. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 4.
|
| 28. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 5.
|
| 29. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 4.
|
| 30. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 6.
|
| 31. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 8.
|
| 32. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 10.
|
| 33. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 11.
|
| 34. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 10.
|
| 35. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 10.
|
| 36. |
See Chapter 6, Halachot 13-14.
|
| 37. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 15.
|
| 38. |
See Chapter 6, Halachah 19.
|
| 39. |
This - and the instances mentioned in situations 18, 20, 22, 24, and 26 - are derived from the principle stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 20, that whenever the perforation of an organ causes an animal to be deemed trefe, the animal is also deemed trefe if that organ is lacking.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam's mentions a lack of only those organs that an animal could exist for a brief time without. If, however, it is impossible for an animal to exist at all without these organs, e.g., the brain and the heart, it is improper to call the animal trefe. Instead a more severe term is appropriate.
|
| 40. |
This - and the instances mentioned in situations 19, 21, 23, 25, and 27 - are derived from the principle stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 20, that whenever an animal to be deemed trefe if organ is lacking, the animal is also deemed trefe if it possesses two of that organ.
|
| 41. |
See Chapter 7, Halachot 1-2.
|
| 42. |
This - and the instances mentioned in situations 19, 21, 23, 25, and 27 - are derived from the principle stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 20, that whenever an animal to be deemed trefe if organ is lacking, the animal is also deemed trefe if it possesses two of that organ.
|
| 43. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 3.
|
| 44. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 6.
|
| 45. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 9.
|
| 46. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 10.
|
| 47. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 9.
|
| 48. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 9.
|
| 49. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 12.
|
| 50. |
See Chapter 7, Halachot 15-19.
|
| 51. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 21.
|
| 52. |
See Chapter 8, Halachot 1-2.
|
| 53. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 3.
|
| 54. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 4.
|
| 55. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 5.
|
| 56. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 7.
|
| 57. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 5.
|
| 58. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 5.
|
| 59. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 8.
|
| 60. |
See Chapter 8, Halachot 9-10.
|
| 61. |
See Chapter 8, Halachot 11-12.
|
| 62. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 11.
|
| 63. |
See Chapter 8, Halachot 13, 15-18.
|
| 64. |
See Chapter 8, Halachot 21-22.
|
| 65. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 23.
|
| 66. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 26.
|
| 67. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 23.
|
| 68. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 23.
|
| 69. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 23.
|
| 70. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 23.
|
| 71. |
See Chapter 9, Halachah 1.
|
| 72. |
See Chapter 9, Halachah 2.
|
| 73. |
See Chapter 9, Halachot 5-6.
|
| 74. |
See Chapter 9, Halachah 7.
|
| 75. |
See Chapter 9, Halachot 8-9.
|
| 76. |
See Chapter 9, Halachah 21.
|
| 77. |
Halachah 1 of the present chapter.
|
| 78. |
Halachah 2 of the present chapter.
|
| 79. |
Halachah 1 of the present chapter.
|
| 80. |
Halachah 1 of the present chapter.
|
| 81. |
Halachah 3 of the present chapter.
|
| 82. |
Halachah 5 of the present chapter.
|
| 83. |
Halachah 5 of the present chapter.
|
| 84. |
Therefore the distinction between its thick and thin end that applies with regard to an animal does not apply with regard to a fowl. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 43:6) rules that a perforation of the spleen does not render a fowl trefe. The Siftei Cohen 43:10, however, quotes opinions that rule that a perforation does render it trefe.
|
| 85. |
I.e., other factors concerning a kidney which render an animal trefe, as mentioned in Chapter 8, Halachah 26. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 44:10) states bluntly: "There are no factors involving the kidneys of a fowl that render it trefe."
|
| 86. |
See Chapter 7, Halachot 20-21. An animal will not be affected in this way, because his ribs will protect him and the skin of his digestive organs are stronger than that of a fowl. The Ra'avad differs and states that if an animal is subjected to heat and it burns its internal organs to this degree, it will surely die immediately. Therefore, our Sages did not mention it as a trefe. TheKessef Mishneh notes that there are two other conditions that render a fowl trefe. They involve perforations in the stomachs. Since parallel - albeit not identical - conditions apply with regard to an animal, the Rambam does not list them as separate categories.
|
| 87. |
See Halachah 7 of this chapter. This stringency applies only to a water fowl, because its membrane is very soft.
|
| 88. |
Chullin 54a makes this statement, implying that in the Talmudic era, these rulings were already established.
|
| 89. |
Kin'at Eliyahu cites Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 17:24 which states:
From that perspective, it would appear that the empirical evidence with which science presents us should be followed. Nevertheless, in this source, the Rambam is very adamant in following the Rabbinic perspective. See Chapter 8, Halachah 25, as a clear example.
|
| 90. |
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 57:18) states that even if the animal survives for over a year, it is still deemed trefe and it is forbidden to partake of it.
|
| 91. |
Kin'at Eliyahu cites Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 17:24 which states:
From that perspective, it would appear that the empirical evidence with which science presents us should be followed. Nevertheless, in this source, the Rambam is very adamant in following the Rabbinic perspective. See Chapter 8, Halachah 25, as a clear example.
|
| 92. |
Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 8:7-9.
|
| 93. |
The Maggid Mishneh writes that although he is not permitted to sell meat on his own, he is permitted to sell under the supervision of a trustworthy expert.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 2:2) rules leniently concerning this manner and allows such a person to continue slaughtering in certain situations. The Siftei Cohen 2:11 questions this leniency.
|
Shechitah - Chapter 11
Halacha 1
[The following principles apply] whenever a situation arises that creates a doubt that an animal or fowl should be deemed trefe because of one of the above conditions - e.g., an animal that fell and did not walk, it was attacked by a wild beast and we do not know whether the flesh near the intestines turned red or not, its skull was crushed and we do not know if the majority of the skull was crushed or not, or other similar circumstances: If the animal was male and it remained alive for twelve months, we operate on the assumption that it is intact like all other animals. If it was female, [we wait] until it gives birth.1
With regard to a fowl: If it is male, [we wait] twelve months. If it is female, [we wait] until it lays all the eggs that it is carrying, spawns a new load, and lays them.
Halacha 2
During this course of time, it is forbidden to sell an animal concerning which doubt has arisen whether it is a trefe to a gentile lest he sell it to a Jew.2
Halacha 3
We operate under the presumption that all domesticated animals, wild beasts, or fowl are healthy3 and we do not suspect that they possess conditions that would render them trefe. Therefore when they are slaughtered in the proper manner, they do not require an examination to see whether they possess a condition that would render them trefe. Instead, we operate under the presumption that they are permitted unless a situation arises that arouses suspicion.4 Afterwards, we inspect it with regard to that condition alone.
Halacha 4
What is implied? For example if the wing of a fowl is displaced, we check the lung to see if it was perforated.5 If an animal fell, we check it to see if its organs were crushed.6 If the skull was crushed, we check the membrane of the brain to see if it was perforated.7 If it was struck by a thorn or shot by an arrow, a javelin, or the like and it entered its inner cavity, our suspicions are aroused and we require an inspection of the entire inner cavity lest it have perforated one of the organs whose perforation renders an animal trefe. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 5
Therefore when there are growths on a lung or sirchos upon it - i.e., strands or adhesions - hanging from it to the ribcage, the heart, or the diaphragm, we suspect that it was perforated and require an inspection.8 Similarly, if a swelling was found that contained fluid, we fear that a bronchiole below it was perforated and [the lung] must be inspected.9
Halacha 6
[Following the logic] of this law, [the following rules] would apply if it was discovered that sirchos like strands were hanging from the lung, whether they extended from the body of the lung to the ribcage or to the heart or to the diaphragm. We cut the sirchah, take out the lung, and [place it] in lukewarm water, and blow it up.10 If it is discovered to be perforated,11 [the animal] istrefe. If the water does not bubble, it is intact, without any perforations, and [the animal] is permitted. For [the sirchah] was not at the place of a perforation12 or perhaps only the outer membrane [of the lung] was perforated. Nevertheless, I never saw anyone who ruled in this manner, nor did I hear of a place that follows such practice.13
Halacha 7
Even though this is what appears [to be the ruling] from the words of the Sages of the Gemara, the widespread custom among the Jewish people is as follows: When a domesticated animal or a wild beast is slaughtered, we tear open the diaphragm and check the lung in its place.14 If a sirchah is not discovered hanging between the one of the lobes and the flesh where it lies, whether on the flesh that is between the ribs or the flesh on the breastbone,15 or a sirchahwas found, extending from one lobe to the other in order,16 or from the body of the lung to the lobe which is next to it,17 we permit [the animal].18
Halacha 8
If a strand is discovered leading from the lung to any place which it is extended, even if it is thin as a hair, we forbid [the animal].19
Halacha 9
Similarly, if there was a strand extending from the lung to the heart, the diaphragm, the protective covering of the heart, or the rose,20 we forbid [the animal]. [This applies] whether the strand came from the body of the lung or whether it came from a lobe and [applies regardless of its size], even if it was a hairsbreadth.21
Similarly, when the rose is attached to its pocket or a strand extends from it to its pocket, we forbid it. And when a strand extends from lobe to lobe in improper order, we forbid [the animal].22
Halacha 10
There are places where the custom is that if a sirchah is from the lobe to the flesh and the bones of the ribs and the sirchah is attached to both of them, they forbid it.23 My father and teacher is from those who forbid it. I, by contrast, am one of those who permit it.24 In a small number of places, they permit it even when it is attached to the bone alone, and I forbid it.25
Halacha 11
There are places where a lung is [always] blown up to see whether or not it is perforated. In most places, however, it is not blown up, because there is no factor that raised a suspicion [concerning it]. In Spain and in the West, we never blew up a lung unless there was a factor that caused suspicion.26
Halacha 12
Halacha 13
If, [after] a person slaughtered an animal and cut open its belly, a dog or a gentile came, took the lung, and departed before [the slaughterer] checked the lung, [the animal] is permitted. We do not say that perhaps it was perforated or perhaps it was attached [to the bone], for we do not presume that [an animal] was forbidden.30 Instead, we operate under the presumption that the animal is kosher unless we know what factor caused it to become trefe. Just like we do not suspect that the membrane of the brain was perforated, the backbone [was severed], or the like, we do not raise suspicions over a lung that has been lost. There are no customs regarding such a situation, because customs are not instituted with regard to factors that are not commonplace.
Halacha 14
If a gentile or a Jew comes and takes out a lung before the lung was inspected, but the lung [still] exists, we blow it up.31 [This applies] even if we do not know whether there were growths or not, because of the widespread custom.
15 There are places who rule that we forbid [an animal] if there are sirchothanging from the lung, even if they are not attached to the chest or to another place. This practice causes great loss and the forfeit of Jewish money. This was never the custom in France or in Spain and it was never heard in the West. It is not proper to follow this custom. Instead, all that is necessary is to blow up [the lung]. If it is discovered to be intact without a perforation, [the animal] is permitted.32
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
I.e., if it gives birth successfully, that is a sign that it is intact. There is no need for an inspection or waiting twelve months. Even the Rama who maintains that in the present age, we are not knowledgeable with regard to inspections will consider an animal acceptable if it lives this amount of time (Yoreh De'ah 57:18).
|
| 2. |
Without informing him of the doubt involved.
The Rama quotes the Sha'arei Dura who writes that if a condition that renders an animal trefe is obvious, we permit its sale to a gentile. For a Jew who seeks to purchase it will immediately become aware of the difficulty.
The Rama also mentions the ruling of the Terumat HaDeshen that if there is merely a question of whether an animal is trefe, it may be sold to a gentile. The Siftei Cohen 57:51 accepts this leniency only with regard to an animal regarding which there is a question whether or not it was attacked, but not with regard to other conditions.
|
| 3. |
Chullin 11b explains that this is based on the principle that we follow the majority. Since most animals are healthy we assume that this is an animal's condition unless there is reason to suspect otherwise. Note, however, Halachah 7.
|
| 4. |
Based on Chullin 51a, the Kessef Mishneh goes further and states that even if the animal possesses a condition that is somewhat problematic, if we can find a commonplace explanation for it that will not render an animal trefe and the factor that will render it trefe is uncommon, we do not require an examination.
|
| 5. |
See Chapter 10, Halachah 4.
|
| 6. |
See Chapter 9, Halachah 17.
|
| 7. |
See Chapter 10, Halachah 7.
|
| 8. |
I.e., the strands and similarly, the other conditions the Rambam proceeds to mention, are abnormal factors that lead us to the supposition that there was a perforation in the lung. See Chapter 7, Halachot 5-11 that mention several situations of this nature.
|
| 9. |
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, maintaining that even if the swelling is an indication that the bronchiole has been perforated, that does not disqualify the animal, for it is possible that it is sealed by flesh. The Radbaz explains that the Rambam would also accept that ruling and one of the points that one must inspect is whether there is flesh under the swelling or not.
|
| 10. |
See Chapter 7, Halachah 8. As mentioned in the notes to that halachah, there is a difference of opinion among the Rishonim concerning this issue.
The Ra'avad also mentions that the Rambam's ruling here appears to contradict his ruling in Chapter 7, Halachah 5. For there, the Rambam differentiates between whether or not there is a bruise on the chest, and there he does not speak of inspecting the lung in warm water. In a lengthy discussion in his gloss to Chapter 7, the Kessef Mishneh explains that there is no contradiction between the two rulings.
|
| 11. |
I.e., if the water bubbles.
|
| 12. |
There is a difference of opinion among the halachic authorities if this situation is possible or not.
|
| 13. |
I.e., as the Rambam proceeds to explain in the following halachah, the common custom is more stringent.
|
| 14. |
See the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 39:1) which states that we must check the lungs for sirchotand concludes: "Whoever breaks ranks and eats without checking [the lung] should be bitten by a snake."
|
| 15. |
For as stated in Chapter 7, Halachot 3-4, even a perforation found in this place does not render the animal trefe.
|
| 16. |
For as stated in Chapter 8, Halachah 5, an adhesion of such a type does not render the animaltrefe.
|
| 17. |
See the notes to Halachah 9. Depending on the version of that text, the Rambam's ruling concerning this matter may be questioned.
|
| 18. |
The Rama 39:18 writes that it is common custom in the Ashkenazic community to rule that allsirchot in the lung cause an animal to be deemed forbidden except those extending from a lobe to the lobe next to it or those from the body of the lung to the lobe next to it. He does, however, permit leniency if it is possible to rub out the sirchah and then examine it to see that there is no perforation.
|
| 19. |
I.e., except to the lobe that is near it (Radbaz).
|
| 20. |
See Chapter 8, Halachah 1, which explains that this is a tiny lobe found on the right side of the lung.
|
| 21. |
For we fear that it will cause a perforation in the lung. See the gloss of the Radbaz to Halachah 6.
|
| 22. |
The text of the Mishneh Torah which the Ra'avad had seemed to apply that even a strand extending from the body of the lung to the lobe is unacceptable. The Ra'avad therefore protests and maintains it is acceptable. The Migdal Oz states that he also saw texts of the Mishneh Torahwith this version, but that the authoritative manuscripts do not follow that reading. This is also the position of the Kessef Mishneh.
|
| 23. |
If the sirchah is attached to the flesh alone, it does not cause an animal to be considered trefe(see Chapter 7, Halachah 4). Here, however, it is attached to both the flesh and the bone and that creates the problem.
|
| 24. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 39:18) cites the Rambam's position.
Parenthetically, the commentaries have questioned the Rambam's statements here from the standpoint of kibud av, "honoring one's father." Seemingly, after mentioning his father, he should have stated - as he himself rules in Hilchot Mamrim 6:5 - "May he be remembered for the life of the world to come." Also, that same source (Halachah 3) forbids "offering an opinion that outweighs [that of his father]."
|
| 25. |
The Ra'avad follows the more lenient view. Here also the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) cites the Rambam's position.
|
| 26. |
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 39:1) mentions both the custom of blowing up the lung in all cases and the Rambam's position that it is not necessary to blow up all lungs. He concludes that the Rambam's position should be given primacy.
|
| 27. |
I.e., the stringencies forbidding an animal because of certain sirchot and requiring the lungs to be blown up.
|
| 28. |
Halachot 6 and 7.
|
| 29. |
At present, there are certain Rabbinic authorities who require that the lungs of a chicken be inspected, because in the present age, since chickens are raised in a manner very different from their natural circumstances, it is common for there to be difficulties with regard to their lungs.
|
| 30. |
If there is no evidence that a factor existed that caused the animal to become trefe, we do not assume that one existed. Even according to the custom that requires an animal to be checked, we are assuming only the possibility that it might have a disqualifying factor. If there is no way to check it, we assume that the animal is kosher.
The Ra'avad differs and maintains that since disqualifying factors involving the lung are common, if a lung was not inspected, we cannot consider the animal as kosher. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 39:2) quotes the Rambam's view. The Rama mentions the position of the Ra'avad and states that the Rambam's position may be followed only when there is a possibility of severe financial loss.
|
| 31. |
Normally, we would not blow up a lung unless there was a factor that aroused suspicion. Nevertheless, in this instance, since we did not see it in its natural situation - and the possibility exists that there were such factors there - we require an examination. The Turei Zahav 39:2 states that, according to our custom [see Rama (Yoreh De'ah 39:4)] that we do not rely on an examination in a situation where there is a clearly problematic situation, we do not rely on an examination in this instance as well.
|
| 32. |
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 39:8) rules that such an animal is permitted without the lung being inspected. The Turei Zahav 39:12 states that an examination must be conducted to see whether the lung is perforated or not.
This represents the difference between glatt meat and meat that is not glatt. Glatt means "smooth," i.e., i.e., there are no sirchot, adhesions, or growths, extending from the animal's lungs. Thus there is no need to inspect it. When meat is not glatt, there were sirchot and/or the like extending from the lungs. They were inspected and no perforation was discovered. Hence, the meat is kosher. Nevertheless, there are many who follow the stringency of not partaking of it.
(It must be emphasized that, at present, glatt is sometimes used as a general term to connote a higher level of punctilious observance of the details of kashrus in general without specifically referring to questions concerning the lungs.)
|
• Friday, Nissan 7, 5775 · 03/27/2015
"Today's Day"
Torah lessons: Chumash: Metzora, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 39-43.
Tanya: In the light of (p. 201)...in Ra'aya Mehemna. (p. 203).
Text of Vay'hi binsoa (p. 185, par. Al): v'chirtzon kol amcha beit yisrael.
The Alter Rebbe's family name was Baruchovitch.
The Mitteler Rebbe's family name was Schneuri.
The Tzemach Tzedek's family name was Schneersohn.
Daily Thought:
Traditions of the Future
We do not keep our traditions for the sake of the past. We keep it for their power to create a future, a power that will never end.
For the Torah was not given to this world so that it should return to its pristine glory as it was created. The Torah was given for this world to transcend itself.[Likutei Sichot 10, pg. 162. Masai 5741:18.]
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment