Today in Jewish History:
• Jews Debate Before Alexander (313 BCE)
Jewish victory in public debate with Ishmaelites, Canaanites and Egyptians before Alexander the Great. (Megillat Taanit 3)
Links:
Alexander of Macedonia ("The Great")
• Three of the "Ten Martyrs" Killed (2nd century CE)
Among the millions of Jews cruelly killed by the Romans were the "Ten Martyrs"--all great sages and leaders of Israel--memorialized in a special prayer recited on Yom Kippur. Three of them--Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel, Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha and Rabbi Chanina S'gan Hakohanim--were killed on Sivan 25.
Links:
The Ten Martyrs
Daily Quote:
Such is the way of creation: first comes darkness, then light[Talmud, Shabbat 77b]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Shlach, 6th Portion Numbers 15:17-15:26 with Rashi
• Chapter 15
17The Lord spoke to Moses saying: יזוַיְדַבֵּר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
18Speak to the children of Israel and you shall say to them, When you arrive in the Land to which I am bringing you, יחדַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם בְּבֹאֲכֶם אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה:
When you arrive in the Land: Heb. בְּבֹאֲכֶם [lit., when you come to the Land] This ‘coming’ differs from all the other ‘comings’ in the Torah. For with the others, Scripture say,“when you will come” [in the singular] (כִּי תָבֹא) or [plural] (כִּי תָבֹאוּ); therefore, all of them learn [a particular law] from each other. Since in one of their cases, Scripture specifies that it applies only after inheritance and settling [in the Land], it therefore applies in all cases. But here it uses the term בְּבֹאֲכֶם as soon as they arrived there and ate from its bread, they were obligated to separate a portion of the dough. - [Sifrei Shelach 21] בבאכם אל הארץ: משונה ביאה זו מכל ביאות שבתורה, שבכולן נאמר כי תבא, כי תבאו, לפיכך כולן למדות זו מזו וכיון שפרט לך הכתוב באחת מהן שאינה אלא לאחר ירושה וישיבה, אף כולן כן, אבל זו נאמר בה בבואכם, משנכנסו בה ואכלו מלחמה נתחייבו בחלה:
19and you eat from the bread of the Land, you shall set aside a gift for the Lord. יטוְהָיָה בַּאֲכָלְכֶם מִלֶּחֶם הָאָרֶץ תָּרִימוּ תְרוּמָה לַיהֹוָה:
20The first portion of your dough, you shall separate a loaf for a gift; as in the case of the gift of the threshing floor, so shall you separate it. כרֵאשִׁית עֲרִסֹתֵכֶם חַלָּה תָּרִימוּ תְרוּמָה כִּתְרוּמַת גֹּרֶן כֵּן תָּרִימוּ אֹתָהּ:
the first portion of your dough: When you knead an amount of dough you are accustomed to kneading in the desert. And how much is that? “They measured with an omer ” (Exod. 16:18), “an omer per head” (verse 16). You shall separate from its first portion, that is to say, before you eat the first portion from it, you shall separate one loaf as a gift for the sake of the Lord. ראשית ערסתכם: כשתלושו כדי עיסתכם שאתם רגילין ללוש במדבר. וכמה היא, (שמות טז, טז) וימודו בעומר עומר לגלגלת, תרימו מראשיתה, כלומר קודם שתאכלו ממנה, ראשית תלקח חלה אחת תרומה לשם ה':
a loaf: In old French, tortel , a sort of cake, a round loaf of bread, [in modern French, torteau.] חלה: טורטי"ל בלע"ז [עוגה]:
as in the case of the gift of the threshing floor: in which no amount is specified, but unlike the gift taken from the tithe [given by Levites to kohanim] for which an amount is specified. However, the Sages did specify an amount-for a householder, one twenty-fourth [of the dough] and for a baker one forty-eighth. - [Challah 2:7] כתרומת גורן: שלא נאמר בה שיעור ולא כתרומת מעשר שנאמר בה שיעור, אבל חכמים נתנו שיעור, לבעל הבית אחד מעשרים וארבעה, ולנחתום אחד מארבעים ושמונה:
21From the first portion of your dough you shall give a gift to the Lord in [all] your generations. כאמֵרֵאשִׁית עֲרִסֹתֵיכֶם תִּתְּנוּ לַיהֹוָה תְּרוּמָה לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם:
From the first portion of your dough: Why is this [verse] stated? [Is not verse 20 sufficient?] Because it says, “the first portion of your dough” (verse 20). From this I understand the first one of the doughs. Hence, Scripture teaches us, “From the first”-a part of the dough but not the entire dough. - [Sifrei Shelach 27] מראשית ערסתיכם: למה נאמר, לפי שנאמר ראשית עריסותיכם, שומע אני ראשונה שבעיסות, תלמוד לומר מראשית, מקצתה ולא כולה:
you shall give a gift to the Lord: Since no amount is specified for the dough portion, [challah], it says, “you shall give ”-the gift should be an amount which can be considered a ‘gift.’ - [Sifrei Shelach 30] תתנו לה' תרומה: לפי שלא שמענו שיעור לחלה, נאמר תתנו, שיהא בה כדי נתינה:
22And if you should err and not fulfill all these commandments, which the Lord spoke to Moses. כבוְכִי תִשְׁגּוּ וְלֹא תַעֲשׂוּ אֵת כָּל הַמִּצְוֹת הָאֵלֶּה אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה:
And if you should err and not fulfill: Idolatry was included in “all the commandments” (Lev. 4:13) for which the community brings a bull [as a sin-offering], but here Scripture removes it from that category to apply to it the law of a bull for a burnt offering and a he-goat for a sin-offering. - [Sifrei Shelach 22] וכי תשגו ולא תעשו: עבודה זרה היתה בכלל כל המצות שהצבור מביאין עליהן פר, והרי הכתוב מוציאה כאן מכללן לידון בפר לעולה ושעיר לחטאת:
If you err: Scripture speaks of idolatry, or perhaps only to one of the other commandments? Scripture therefore states, “all of these commandments.” One commandment which is equivalent to all the commandments. Just as someone who transgresses all the commandments, casts off the yoke [of the Torah], violates the covenant, and acts brazenly [toward the Torah], so one who transgresses this commandment, casts off the yoke, violates the covenant, and acts brazenly. Which [one] is this? This is idolatry. - [Sifrei Shelach 33] וכי תשגו וגו': בעבודה זרה הכתוב מדבר, או אינו אלא באחת מכל המצות, תלמוד לומר את כל המצות האלה, מצוה אחת שהיא ככל המצות, מה העובר על כל המצות פורק עול ומפר ברית ומגלה פנים, אף מצוה זו פורק בה עול ומפר ברית ומגלה פנים ואיזו, זו עבודה זרה:
which the Lord spoke to Moses: [The first two commandments,] “I am [the Lord, your God]” and “You must not have [any other gods]” (Exod. 20:2-3) were heard by the word of the Divine, as it says, “Once did God speak, but we heard them twice” (Ps. 62:12). - [Sifrei Shelach 33] אשר דבר ה' אל משה: אנכי ולא יהיה לך מפי הגבורה שמענום, (תהלים סב יב) אחת דבר א-להים שתים זו שמעתי:
23All that the Lord commanded you through Moses, from the day on which the Lord commanded and from then on, for all generations. כגאֵת כָּל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֲלֵיכֶם בְּיַד משֶׁה מִן הַיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה וָהָלְאָה לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם:
All that the Lord commanded: This teaches us that anyone who acknowledges [the truth of] idolatry is considered as if he had denied the entire Torah and all the prophecies of the prophets, as it says,“from the day on which the Lord commanded and from then on.” - [Sifrei Shelach 33] את כל אשר צוה וגו': מגיד שכל המודה בעבודה זרה ככופר בכל התורה כולה ובכל מה שנתנבאו הנביאים, שנאמר למן היום אשר צוה ה' והלאה:
24If because of the eyes of the congregation it was committed inadvertently, the entire congregation shall prepare a young bull as a burnt offering for a pleasing fragrance for the Lord, with its prescribed meal offering and libation, and one young he goat for a sin offering. כדוְהָיָה אִם מֵעֵינֵי הָעֵדָה נֶעֶשְׂתָה לִשְׁגָגָה וְעָשׂוּ כָל הָעֵדָה פַּר בֶּן בָּקָר אֶחָד לְעֹלָה לְרֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַיהֹוָה וּמִנְחָתוֹ וְנִסְכּוֹ כַּמִּשְׁפָּט וּשְׂעִיר עִזִּים אֶחָד לְחַטָּת:
If because of the eyes of the congregation it was committed inadvertently: If, because of the leaders [literally, eyes] of the congregation this transgression was committed inadvertently-for they [the leaders] erred and ruled concerning one form of service, that it was permitted to worship an idol in this manner. — [See Horioth 2b] אם מעיני העדה נעשתה לשגגה: אם מעיני העדה נעשתה עבירה זו ע"י שוגג, כגון ששגגו והורו על אחת מן העבודות שהיא מותרת לעבוד עבודה זרה בכך:
for a sin-offering: Heb. לְחַטָּת [This word] is missing an ‘aleph,’ because this [sin-offering] is different from all other sin-offerings. In the case of all the other sin-offerings [mentioned] in the Torah which are brought together with a burnt offering, the sin-offering precedes the burnt offering, as it says, “he shall make the second one a burnt offering” (Lev. 5:10), but this one-the burnt offering-precedes the sin-offering. - [Hor. 13a] לחטת: חסר אלף שאינו כשאר חטאות, שכל חטאות שבתורה הבאות עם עולה החטאת קודמת לעולה, שנאמר (ויקרא ה, י) ואת השני יעשה עולה, וזו עולה קודמת לחטאת:
25The kohen shall atone on behalf of the entire congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them, for it was an error, and they have brought their offering as a fire offering to the Lord and their sin offering before the Lord because of their error. כהוְכִפֶּר הַכֹּהֵן עַל כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְנִסְלַח לָהֶם כִּי שְׁגָגָה הִוא וְהֵם הֵבִיאוּ אֶת קָרְבָּנָם אִשֶּׁה לַיהֹוָה וְחַטָּאתָם לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה עַל שִׁגְגָתָם:
and they have brought their offering as a fire-offering to the Lord: This refers to [the offering] stated in the passage [in verse 24], namely the bull [which is brought as a] burnt offering, as it says [here], “a fire-offering to the Lord.” - [Sifrei Shelach 37] הביאו את קרבנם אשה לה': זה האמור בפרשה הוא פר העולה שנאמר אשה לה':
and their sin-offering: This [refers to] the he-goat [in verse 24]. - [Sifrei Shelach 37] וחטאתם: זה השעיר:
26The entire congregation of the children of Israel and the proselyte who resides with them shall be forgiven, for all the people were in error. כווְנִסְלַח לְכָל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְלַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכָם כִּי לְכָל הָעָם בִּשְׁגָגָה:Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapter 119, Verses 1-96
• Verses 1-96
David composed this prominent psalm in alphabetical sequence-eight verses for each letter. Every verse contains one of the following words (referring to different aspects of Torah): Way; Torah; Testimony; Precept; Commandment; Statement (translated here as Word or Promise); Word; Judgement (or Laws); Righteousness; Statute. Replete with morals and prayers, this psalm should be recited daily, as a powerful preparation for the service of God. (In verses beginning with one of the letters of the mnemonic PeReTZ BeN DaMaH, the word "עדותיך" is pronounced "eidvotecha.")
1. Fortunate are those whose way is artless, who walk with the Torah of the Lord.
2. Fortunate are those who keep His testimonies, who seek Him with all their hearts.
3. Indeed, they have not done iniquity; they walk in His ways.
4. You have commanded Your precepts to be observed diligently.
5. My wish is that my ways be directed to keep Your statutes.
6. Then I will not be ashamed, when I behold all Your commandments.
7. I will give thanks to You with uprightness of heart, when I learn Your righteous judgments.
8. I will keep Your statutes; do not utterly forsake me
9. How can a young man keep his way pure? By observing Your word.
10. With all my heart I have sought You; do not let me stray from Your commandments.
11. I have harbored Your word in my heart, that I might not sin against You.
12. Blessed are You, O Lord; teach me Your statutes.
13. With my lips I have declared all the judgments of Your mouth.
14. I have rejoiced in the way of Your testimonies, as I would with all riches.
15. I will speak of Your precepts, and gaze upon Your ways.
16. I will delight in Your statutes; I will not forget Your word.
17. Deal kindly with Your servant, that I may live to keep Your word.
18. Unveil my eyes, that I may behold wonders from Your Torah.
19. I am a sojourner on earth; do not hide Your commandments from me.
20. My soul is crushed with a longing for Your judgments every moment.
21. You have rebuked the accursed scoffers, those who stray from Your commandments.
22. Remove insult and contempt from me, for I have kept Your testimonies.
23. Though princes sat and spoke against me, Your servant speaks of Your statutes.
24. Indeed, Your testimonies are my delight; they are my counsellors.
25. My soul cleaves to the dust; revive me in accordance with Your word.
26. I have spoken of my ways, and You answered me; teach me Your statutes.
27. Make me understand the way of Your precepts, and I will speak of Your wonders.
28. My soul drips away out of grief; sustain me according to Your word.
29. Remove from me the way of falsehood, and graciously endow me with Your Torah.
30. I have chosen the way of faith; Your judgments have I laid before me.
31. I held fast to Your testimonies, O Lord; put me not to shame.
32. I will run on the path of Your commandments, for You will broaden my heart.
33. Teach me, O Lord, the way of Your statutes, and I will keep it to the last.
34. Grant me understanding and I will keep Your Torah; I will observe it with all my heart.
35. Direct me in the path of Your commandments, for that is my desire.
36. Incline my heart to Your testimonies, and not to greed.
37. Avert my eyes from seeing vanity; by Your ways give me life.
38. Fulfill for Your servant Your promise, which brings to the fear of You.
39. Remove my shame which I fear, for Your judgments are good.
40. Behold, I have longed for Your precepts; give me life in Your righteousness.
41. And let Your kindness come to fruition for me, O Lord, Your salvation as You promised.
42. I will offer a retort to those who taunt me, for I trust in Your word.
43. Do not at all remove the word of truth from my mouth, for I hope [to fulfill] Your judgments.
44. I will keep Your Torah continually, for ever and ever.
45. And I will walk in spacious paths, for I seek Your precepts.
46. I will speak of Your testimonies before kings, and I will not be ashamed.
47. And I will delight in Your commandments, which I love.
48. I will lift up my hands to Your commandments, which I love, and I will speak of Your statutes.
49. Remember the word [promised] to Your servant, by which You gave me hope.
50. This is my comfort in my affliction, for Your word has given me life.
51. [Though] the wicked ridicule me severely, I have not strayed from Your Torah.
52. When I remember Your judgments of old, O Lord, I take comfort.
53. Trembling seized me because of the wicked, those who forsake Your Torah.
54. Your statutes have been my songs in the house of my wanderings.
55. At night I remembered Your Name, O Lord, and I kept Your Torah.
56. All this came to me because I kept Your precepts.
57. The Lord is my portion; I pledged to keep Your words.
58. I pleaded before You with all my heart: have compassion upon me according to Your word.
59. I contemplated my ways, and returned my feet to Your testimonies.
60. I hurried and did not delay to keep Your commandments.
61. Bands of wicked men plundered me, [but] I did not forget Your Torah.
62. At midnight, I rise to thank You for Your righteous judgments.
63. I am a friend to all who fear You, and to those who keep Your precepts.
64. Your kindness, O Lord, fills the earth; teach me Your statutes.
65. You have dealt goodness to Your servant, O Lord, in accord with Your promise.
66. Teach me the goodness and wisdom of the [Torah's] reasons, for I believe in Your commandments.
67. Before I afflicted myself, I would blunder; but now I observe Your word.
68. You are good and benevolent; teach me Your statutes.
69. The wicked have smeared me with lies, [when in truth] I keep Your precepts with all my heart.
70. Their hearts grew thick as fat; but as for me, Your Torah is my delight.
71. It is for my good that I was afflicted, so that I might learn Your statutes.
72. The Torah of Your mouth is better for me than thousands in gold and silver.
73. Your hands have made me and prepared me; grant me understanding, that I may learn Your commandments.
74. Those who fear You will see me and rejoice, because I hoped in Your word.
75. I know, O Lord, that Your judgments are just; righteously have You afflicted me.
76. Let Your kindness be my comfort, as You promised to Your servant.
77. Let Your mercies come upon me, that I may live, for Your Torah is my delight.
78. Let the scoffers be shamed, for they have maligned me with falsehood; but I will meditate upon Your precepts.
79. May those who fear You return to me, and those who know Your testimonies.
80. May my heart be perfect in Your statutes, so that I not be shamed.
81. My soul longs for Your salvation; I hope for Your word.
82. My eyes long for Your promise, saying, "When will You comfort me?”
83. Though I became [dried out] like a wineskin in smoke, I did not forget Your statutes.
84. How many are the days of Your servant? When will You execute judgment upon my pursuers?
85. The wicked have dug pits for me, in violation of Your Torah.
86. All Your commandments teach truth, [yet] they pursue me with lies, help me!
87. They nearly consumed me upon the earth, but I did not forsake Your precepts.
88. As befits Your kindness, grant me life, and I will keep the testimony of Your mouth.
89. Forever, O Lord, Your word stands firm in the heavens.
90. Your faithfulness persists for all generations; You established the earth, and it stands.
91. They stand ready today [to execute] Your judgments, for all are Your servants.
92. Had Your Torah not been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.
93. Never will I forget Your precepts, for through them You have sustained me.
94. I am Yours; save me, for I have sought Your precepts.
95. The wicked hope to destroy me, but I meditate upon Your testimonies.
96. To every goal I have seen a limit, but Your commandment is immensely broad.
Tanya: Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, end of Chapter 7• Lessons in Tanya
• Friday, Sivan 25, 5775 · June 12, 2015
Today's Tanya Lesson
Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, end of Chapter 7
כי מקור החיות הוא רוח פיו של הקב״ה, המתלבש בעשרה מאמרות שבתורה
For the source of the life-force is the “breath of the mouth” of the Holy One, blessed be He; it becomes enclothed in the Ten Utterances of the Torah, from which all created beings come into existence.
ורוח פיו יתברך היה יכול להתפשט לאין קץ ותכלית, ולברוא עולמות אין קץ ותכלית לכמותם ואיכותם, ולהחיותם עדי עד
The “breath of His mouth” could have diffused without end and limit, and created worlds infinite in their quantity and quality, and given [them] life forever, unlike their present state, in which they are limited in all these respects,
ולא היה נברא עולם הזה כלל
and this corporeal world, all of whose beings are limited and finite, would not have been created at all.
It was the contraction of the life-force that made possible the creation of this physical, limited world with its finite creatures.
The reason why the “breath of His mouth” — were it not to have been contracted — would have created worlds without end, is now explained by the Alter Rebbe in the parenthesis.
שכמו שהקב״ה נקרא אין סוף, כך כל מדותיו ופעולותיו, דאיהו וגרמוהי חד
(For just as the Holy One, blessed be He, is called “Infinite”, so are all His attributes and actions [infinite], “for He and His attributes are one”;
דהיינו החיות הנמשך ממדותיו, שהן חסד ורחמים ושאר מדותיו הקדושות, על ידי התלבשותן שמתלבשות ברוח פיו
i.e., the life-force that emanates from His attributes, namely, Kindness and Mercy and His other holy attributes, [emanates from them] through their being enclothed in the “breath of His mouth,” which refers to the Sefirah of Malchut.
כי הוא אמר ויהי
For creation results from G‑d’s speech and the “breath of His mouth,” as Scripture states,1“For He spoke — and it came into being.”
ועולם על ידי חסד יבנה
Moreover, creation came about through Chesed, as it is written,2 “The world is built through Chesed,”
But how is it that the world is created both through Chesed and Malchut (the “word of G‑d”)? This means: the attribute of Chesed vests itself within Malchut,
בדבר ה׳ ורוח פיו, הנעשה כלי ולבוש לחסד זה
so that creation takes place through “the word of G‑d and the breath of His mouth,” which becomes a vessel and “garment” for this creative attribute of Chesed,3
כהדין קמצא דלבושיה מיניה וביה
“like the snail, whose garment is an integral component of his body.”)
The “word of His mouth” is thus a garment and vessel that unites with the attribute ofChesed, from which the world was created. The life-force emanating from the “breath of His mouth” is thus capable of creating worlds which are infinite both quantitatively and qualitatively.
אלא שצמצם הקב״ה האור והחיות שיוכל להתפשט מרוח פיו
The Holy One, blessed be He, however, contracted the light and life-force that could diffuse from the “breath of His mouth,”
והלבישו תוך צירופי אותיות של עשרה מאמרות וצירופי צירופיהן
and invested it in the combinations of the letters of the Ten Utterances, and the combinations of their combinations,
בחילופי ותמורות האותיות עצמן, ובחשבונן ומספרן
by substitutions and transpositions of the letters themselves and their numerical values and equivalents.
שכל חילוף ותמורה מורה על ירידת האור והחיות ממדרגה למדרגה
For each substitution and transposition indicates the descent of the light and life-force degree by degree,
דהיינו שיוכל לברוא ולהחיות ברואים, שמדרגת איכותם ומעלתם היא פחותה ממדרגת איכות ומעלת הברואים הנבראים מאותיות ותיבות עצמן שבעשרה מאמרות
so that it will be able to create and give life to creatures whose quality and significance is lower than the quality and significance of the creatures created from the very letters and words of the Ten Utterances
שבהן מתלבש הקב״ה בכבודו ובעצמו, שהן מדותיו
within which is enclothed the Holy One, blessed be He, in His Glory and Essence — which are His attributes, since they are one with G‑d Himself.
והחשבון מורה על מיעוט האור והחיות, מיעוט אחר מיעוט
The numerical value — even when it is not calculated through the substitution and transposition of letters — indicates the progressive diminution of the light and life-force,
עד שלא נשאר ממנו אלא בחינה אחרונה, שהוא בחינת החשבון ומספר כמה מיני כחות ומדרגות כלולות באור וחיות הזה, המלובש בצירוף זה של תיבה זו
until there remains from it only the final level, which is that of the sum and number of kinds of powers and grades contained in the light and life-force invested in a particular letter-combination of a particular word.
The extent of the remaining life-force is indicated by the sum, which reflects the progressive descent and the constant diminution of the life-force.
ואחר כל הצמצומים האלה וכיוצא בהן, כאשר גזרה חכמתו יתברך
(4It is only after all these contractions and others like them, as [G‑d’s] Wisdom has ordained,
הוא שהיה יכול האור והחיות להתלבש גם בתחתונים, כמו אבנים ועפר הדומם
that the life-force could invest itself even in the lower created beings, such as inanimate stones and dust in which no life-force at all is revealed, inasmuch as they represent the lowest levels of the nether created beings.
כי אבן, דרך משל, שמה מורה כי שרשה משם העולה ב״ן במספרו
For example, the name אבן ("stone") indicates that its source is in the Divine Name ב"ן which numerically equals fifty-two (נ"ב) i.e., the numerical value of the Divine Name Havayah when spelled out phonetically in a particular way,
ועוד אלף נוספת משם אחר (לישעם) [נראה שצריך להיות: לטעם] הידוע ליוצרה
with an alef added to it from another Name, for a reason known to its Creator.
והנה שם ב״ן בעצמו הוא בעולמות עליונים מאד
Now, the Name ב"ן, itself relates to very high worlds, and in its pristine state it can in no way serve as the source of physical stone,
רק שעל ידי צמצומים רבים ועצומים ממדרגה למדרגה, ירד ממנו חיות מועטת במאד מאד, עד שתוכל להתלבש באבן
yet through numerous and powerful contractions, degree by degree, i.e., from higher to lower levels, there descended from it a life-force so exceedingly diminished that it could clothe itself in a stone.
וזו היא נפש הדומם, המחיה ומהוה אותו מאין ליש בכל רגע, וכמו שכתוב לעיל
And this very greatly condensed life-force is the soul of the inanimate being, which gives it life and brings it into existence ex nihilo at every instant, as has been explained previously — in ch. 1, where it is stated that even inanimate creatures possess a soul that brings them into existence at every instant.
וזו היא בחינת ממלא כל עלמין, מה שאין כן בחינת סובב כל עלמין
This greatly condensed life-force is the level of “He fills all worlds,” as opposed to the level of “He encompasses all worlds”),5 wherein the life-force is not contracted in proportion to the spiritual capacity of created beings.
In summary: The Divine life-force is capable of creating worlds that are infinite both in quantity and in quality. Finite beings are created only when this life-force garbs itself in the letters and transpositions of the letters of the Ten Utterances and in their numerical values.
וכל כח ומדרגה יכול לברוא ברואים כפי בחינת מדרגה זו, גם כן לאין קץ ותכלית בכמותם ואיכותם, להחיות עדי עד
Each power and grade [of the life-force] — after it has descended and undergone contractions, so that there remains only the numerical equivalent of the letters of the Ten Utterances — would be able to create beings according to its own level, even unlimited in quantity and quality, giving [them] everlasting life,
מאחר שהוא כח ה׳ המתפשט ונאצל מרוח פיו, ואין מעצור כו׳
since it is the power of G‑d that diffuses and emanates from the “breath of His mouth,” and there is no restraint [to His ability to create unlimited worlds].
אך שלא יהיה איכותם במעלה גדולה כל כך, כאיכות ומעלת ברואים שיוכלו להבראות מבחינת כח ומדרגת האותיות עצמן
Their quality, however, would not be on a level as high as the quality and level of the creatures which could be created from the power and degree of the letters themselves.
I.e., the created beings resulting from the transposition of letters, and surely from the numerical value of the letters, would be inferior to the beings which could be created from the letters themselves
Commentary of the Rebbe On Chapter Seven
1. Among the explanations and innovative interpretations of the Alter Rebbe in Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, two major points stand out:
(a) The explanation of the “comment of the Baal Shem Tov” on the verse,6 “Forever, O G‑d, Your word stands firm in the heavens”; namely, that7 “‘Your word’ which You uttered, [viz.,8] ‘Let there be a firmament...,’ these [very] words and letters stand firmly forever within the firmament of heaven…to give them life…. For if the letters were to depart [even] for an instant, G‑d forbid, and return to their source, all the heavens would become naught and absolute nothingness, and it would be as though they had never existed at all,…exactly as before the Six Days of Creation.”
From this it will be understood9 “that each creature and being is in reality considered to be naught and nothingness in relation to the activating force and the ‘breath of His mouth’ which is within it, continuously calling it into existence and bringing it from absolute non-being into being.”
(b) The tzimtzum is not to be understood10 “literally — that the Holy One, blessed be He, removed Himself and His Essence, G‑d forbid, from this world, and only guides from above, with individual Providence, all the created beings which are in the heavens above and on the earth below.”
It could be argued (see below) that this statement — that tzimtzum is not to be understood in its literal sense — proceeds from the explanation of the Baal Shem Tov’s comment by way of corollary.
2.What is novel about the comment of the Baal Shem Tov is not only that the word of G‑d must constantly create all beings, but that the words “Let there be a firmament” must be11“forever clothed within all the heavens to give them life.”
The same is true of all other created beings: the words and letters of the Ten Utterances which create them and provide them with life must be continuously vested within them.
(Thus indeed the Alter Rebbe explains at length12 how within every creature there is “a soul and spiritual life-force.” For even those beings not specifically mentioned in the Ten Utterances in the Torah also receive a spiritual life-force which descends from them by stages “by means of substitutions and transpositions of the letters, and by gematriot…until [the life-force] can be condensed and enclothed, and a particular creature can be brought forth from it.”)
Hence, rather than the Divine Utterance constantly creating a creature, which then becomes sundered from it, the Divine Utterance is actually vested within the particular creature itself — within its “space”, so to speak — to the point that the life-force (and soul) of every individual created being is the Divine Utterance that is clothed within it.
It may thus be understood how “every creature and being is in reality considered to be naught and nothingness in relation to the activating force and the ‘breath of His mouth’ which is within it, continuously calling it into existence and bringing it from absolute non-being into being.”
Accordingly, it would seem that the nullification of the created being is not total, for the life-force that permeates and enclothes itself within the created being is attenuated and limited (to suit each individual creature). As such, it “allows for a being’s existence.” Consequently, the nullification resulting from this life-force is also not complete.13
However, according to what the Alter Rebbe goes on to explain — that tzimtzum is not to be understood in its literal sense, G‑d forbid — this difficulty is resolved. For even in the “place” (i.e., level) in which the light and life-force contracts and enclothes itself within created beings,14 “There is no place devoid of Him,” and15 “His Essence and Being…completely fills the whole earth temporally and spatially.”
Thus the following two opposites coexist within each created being: Every created being possesses its own “soul and spiritual life-force” which it receives through the tzimtzum and vesting of the Divine Utterance within it; at the same time, every created being is bound up with the very Essence of G‑d, for in the same “place” in which it is found, G‑d’s “Essence and Being” is also to be found.
And the fact that G‑d’s Essence utterly transcends the world makes it possible for one to perceive that the existence of the world itself is G‑dliness (as in the classic phrase,16 “The created being is True Being”) —17 “There is none else apart from Him.”
From Likkutei Sichot, Vol. 25 (Kehot, N.Y., 1987), p. 193 (Parshat Vayeishev, Yud-TetKislev, 5744)
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Tehillim 33:9. |
| 2. | Cf. ibid. 89:3. |
| 3. | Note of the Rebbe: “As mentioned above, in Part I, end of ch. 21; quoted from Bereishit Rabbah 21:5.” |
| 4. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 5. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 6. | Tehillim 119:89. |
| 7. | See above, ch. 1. |
| 8. | Bereishit 1:6. |
| 9. | See above, ch. 3, where this is explained at length. |
| 10. | See above, ch. 7 (s.v. “In the light...”). |
| 11. | See above, ch. 1. |
| 12. | See above, ch. 1. |
| 13. | See Hemshech Taf-Reish-Samech-Vav (Kehot, N.Y., 1984), p. 224. |
| 14. | Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 57, quoted above in ch. 7 (s.v. “In the light...”). |
| 15. | See above, ch. 7. |
| 16. | Biurei HaZohar, Parshat Beshallach (43c ff.); On the Essence of Chassidus, chs. 15-17. |
| 17. | Devarim 4:35. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:
Friday, Sivan 25, 5775 · June 12, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
"On the fourteenth day of the second month, in the afternoon, they shall do it"—Numbers 9:11.
One who was prevented from offering the Paschal Offering in its proper time is commanded to offer the "Second Passover" one month later, on the 14th of Iyar.
Women are exempt from this mitzvah.
Positive Commandment 56
Eating the Paschal Offering
"And they shall eat the meat on that night, roasted over the fire, together with matzah; with bitter herbs they shall eat it"—Exodus 12:8.
We are commanded to eat the Paschal Offering on the eve of the fifteenth of Nissan [the first night of Passover], according to all the requirements detailed in the Torah: it must be roasted, eaten all in one home, and accompanied by the consumption of matzah and bitter herbs.
Positive Commandment 58
Eating the Second Passover Offering
"And eat it with matzah and bitter herbs"—Numbers 9:11.
[Those who must offer the "Second Passover," as explained in Positive Commandment 57, are] commanded to eat the Second Passover Offering on the eve of the fifteenth of Iyar, together with matzah and bitter herbs.
Women are exempt from this mitzvah (just as they are exempt from offering the Second Passover Offering).
Link p57
• 1 Chapter: Kiddush HaChodesh Kiddush HaChodesh - Chapter Two
Hayom Yom:
• Friday, Sivan 25, 5775 · 12 June 2015
"Today's Day"
Torah lessons: Chumash: Korach, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 119, 1-96.
Tanya: And this is stated (p. 315)...He fills them. (p. 315).
"A care in a man's heart, yash'chena."1 Our sages offer2 two interpretations of that last word: "Remove the care from the mind"3 or "discuss it with others."4
The Tzemach Tzedek commented: "...with others" who are "others" only in the bodily sense, but are completely united with him, for they empathize with him.
FOOTNOTES
1. Mishlei 12:25.
2. Yoma 75a.
3. Reading yasichena, from the expression yasiach da'at "forget" or "turn one's mind away."
4. Reading yesichena, "talk," "discuss."Daily Thought:
The Taller They Are...
You might think that divine sparks are meted out by simple protocol: The lowlier the creation, the lowlier the divine spark it holds.
Just the opposite: Only the highest sparks could descend to the lowest places and retain their power to sustain a being.
Those are the sparks remaining to be rescued today.[Likkutei Torah, Tzav 13b and Re’eh 19c. Maamar Beshaah She’alah 5729:6.]
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
"On the fourteenth day of the second month, in the afternoon, they shall do it"—Numbers 9:11.
One who was prevented from offering the Paschal Offering in its proper time is commanded to offer the "Second Passover" one month later, on the 14th of Iyar.
Women are exempt from this mitzvah.
The Second Passover
Positive Commandment 57
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 57th mitzvah is that one who was unable [to bring] the Pesach offering is commanded to slaughter the second Pesach offering.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "[Any person who is impure or far away3...] He shall bring it on the afternoon of the 14th of the second month."
One who is so inclined could challenge me here4 by asking, "Why do you count the second Pesach offering [separately], in contradiction to your Seventh Introductory Principle, where you said that the [individual] laws relating to a single commandment are not counted as separate commandments?"
One who asks such a question should realize that our Sages already disagreed as to whether the second Pesach is included in the laws of the first Pesach or whether it is a separate commandment. The halachic ruling is that it is a separate commandment, and is therefore counted individually.
Our Sages said in tractate Pesachim,5 "'One is punished by kares [for not bringing an offering] on the first [Pesach] and one is punished by kares [for not bringing an offering] on the second [Pesach].' These are the words of Rebbi [Yehuda HaNasi]. Rabbi Nasan says, 'One is punished by kares [for not bringing an offering] on the first [Pesach] and one is exempt [for not bringing an offering] on the second [Pesach].' Rabbi Chananya ben Akavya says, 'One is exempt even [for not bringing an offering] on the first [Pesach] unless he did not bring the second [Pesach].'" The Talmud then asks, "What is the basis of their disagreement? Rebbi holds that the second [Pesach] is a separate holiday. Rabbi Nasan holds that the second [Pesach] is to make up for the first." This explains clearly what I alluded to above.6
It says there, "Therefore, one who acted intentionally in both," — i.e. intentionally did not bring the first Pesach offering nor the second Pesach offering — "is guilty according to all opinions. One who acted unintentionally in both is exempt according to all opinions. One who acted intentionally in the first and unintentionally in the second, is guilty according to Rebbi and Rabbi Nasan, and exempt according to Rabbi Chananya ben Akavya." Rebbi holds that he is guilty even if he acted intentionally on the first and actually brought the offering on the second. This is because he does not hold that the second is to make up for the first.
The halachic conclusion in all these cases is in accordance with Rebbi.7
Women are not obligated in this commandment, as it explains there,8 "Women are permitted [but not obligated] in the second [Pesach offering]."9
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Pesachim.
FOOTNOTES
1.Pesach Sheini, brought on the 14th of Iyar, one month after the regular Pesach offering.
2.Num. 9:10-11.
3.From Jerusalem.
4.In addition to the previous commandment, P56 (printed immediately below, as per the study schedule, based on the order in Mishneh Torah).
5.93a.
6.I.e. that the halachic ruling is that it is a separate commandment. This is because the halachic conclusion is in accordance with Rebbi, who says that it is a "separate holiday."
7.And the second Pesach offering is therefore counted as a separate commandment.
8.Pesachim 91b.
9.Women are obligated in all prohibitions and all positive commandments which are not bound to a specific time. If the positive, time-bound commandment has a corresponding prohibition (such as Shabbos, Pesach, or other holidays), women are also obligated. If the positive, time-bound commandment has no corresponding prohibition, such as the second Pesach offering, women are exempt.
Positive Commandment 56
Eating the Paschal Offering
"And they shall eat the meat on that night, roasted over the fire, together with matzah; with bitter herbs they shall eat it"—Exodus 12:8.
We are commanded to eat the Paschal Offering on the eve of the fifteenth of Nissan [the first night of Passover], according to all the requirements detailed in the Torah: it must be roasted, eaten all in one home, and accompanied by the consumption of matzah and bitter herbs.
Eating the Paschal Offering
Positive Commandment 56
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 56th mitzvah is that we are commanded to eat the Pesach lamb on the night of the 15th of Nissan, keeping all the conditions which are stated, i.e. that it be roasted, that it be eaten in one house, and that it be eaten with Matzah and bitter vegetables.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "Eat the meat on this night, roasted over fire. With Matzah and bitter vegetables you shall eat it."
Perhaps a questioner will challenge me, "Why do you count eating the Pesach [offering], Matzah, and bitter vegetables as a single commandment rather than as three commandments? Eating Matzah is a mitzvah, eating the bitter vegetables is a mitzvah, and eating the Pesach offering is a mitzvah!"
I will answer him that, "eating Matzah is a separate commandment," is correct, as we shall explain.2 It is also correct that eating the meat of the Pesach offering is a commandment, as we mentioned. But the bitter vegetables are secondary to eating the Pesach offering, and are not counted separately.
The proof of this is that it is a mitzvah to eat the meat of the Pesach offering whether or not there are bitter vegetables. But the bitter vegetables are not eaten unless there is meat from the Pesach offering, as it is written in G‑d's statement3 (exalted be He), "Eat it with Matzah and bitter vegetables." If one ate the bitter vegetables without the meat from the Pesach offering, he certainly accomplished nothing; we do not say that he fulfilled [at least] one commandment, i.e. that of eating the bitter vegetables.
In the words of the Mechilta,4 "The verse says, '...roasted over fire, with Matzah and bitter vegetables.' This verse teaches that the commandment of the Pesach offering is roasted meat with Matzah and bitter vegetables," i.e. that the [single] commandment includes all of them.
It [also] says there, "From which words do we derive that those who do not have Matzah or bitter vegetables fulfill their obligation [just] by eating the Pesach offering? From the [apparently extra] expression,5 'you shall eat it,'" — i.e. the meat by itself.
"One might think that just as those who lack Matzah and bitter vegetables fulfill their obligation [just] by eating the Pesach offering, so too those who lack the Pesach offering fulfill their obligation [just] by eating Matzah and bitter vegetables. One might make the following comparison: since [eating] the Pesach offering is a Positive commandment and [eating] the Matzah and bitter vegetables is a [separate] Positive commandment, once you learn that if they lack Matzah and bitter vegetables, they fulfill their obligation [just] by eating the Pesach offering, so too, if they lack the Pesach offering, they fulfill their obligation by eating [just] Matzah and bitter vegetables.
[To teach that this comparison is wrong,] "The Torah therefore says, 'you shall eat it.' "6
It also says there, "The expression, '[With Matzah and bitter vegetables] you shall eat it,' teaches that the Pesach offering is eaten when one is full, but the Matzah and bitter vegetable are not eaten when one is full." This is because the [primary] commandment is to eat the meat [of the offering], as it is written, "Eat the meat on this night."
[In conclusion,] the bitter vegetables are secondary and requisite to the Pesach offering, as clear from the above quotes to anyone who understands them.
The clear proof of this is the basic principle given in the Talmud,7 "[Eating] bitter vegetables today is [only] a Rabbinic obligation." This is because there is no Torah obligation to eat it by itself; it is eaten [only] if there is meat from the Pesach offering. This is a clear and obvious proof that it is secondary to the commandment, and that eating it is not a separate commandment.
The details of this mitzvah too are explained in tractate Pesachim.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 12:8.
2.P158, which is later in the order of Sefer HaMitzvos. Eating Matzah is counted as a separate commandment, because there is a separate verse that speaks exclusively about Matzah. Bitter vegetables, however, are mentioned only together with the Pesach offering, and are therefore not counted as a separate commandment.
3.Num. 9:11.
4.Parshas Bo. The Rambam intersperses his explanation within the words of the Mechilta to clarify his point that there is no commandment to eat bitter vegetables alone.
5.Ex. 12:8.
6.I.e. only the Pesach offering is a commandment by itself. Other versions of the Mechilta omit this last line, leading to an opposite conclusion. See Mechilta d'R. Yishmael (Horovitz-Rabin ed. 1960), Torah Shleimah, Ex. 12:182 and miluim ch. 19.
7.120a.
Positive Commandment 58
Eating the Second Passover Offering
"And eat it with matzah and bitter herbs"—Numbers 9:11.
[Those who must offer the "Second Passover," as explained in Positive Commandment 57, are] commanded to eat the Second Passover Offering on the eve of the fifteenth of Iyar, together with matzah and bitter herbs.
Women are exempt from this mitzvah (just as they are exempt from offering the Second Passover Offering).
Link p57
Eating the second Passover Offering
Positive Commandment 58
Translated by Berel Bell
And the 58th mitzvah is that we are commanded to eat the meat of the second Pesach offering, together with Matzah and bitter vegetables, during the night of the 15th of Iyar
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He) also regarding it,1 "With Matzah and bitter vegetables you shall eat it."
The details of this mitzvah too are explained in Pesachim.2
It is clear that women are exempt from this commandment. Just as they are exempt from its slaughter, as we explained earlier,3 they are undoubtedly exempt from eating it.
FOOTNOTES
1.I.e. the second Pesach offering, Num. 9:11, like that of the first Pesach offering, Ex. 12:8.
2.95a.
3.P57.
Kiddush HaChodesh - Chapter Two
Halacha 1
The only testimony that is acceptable with regard to [the sighting of] the new [moon] is that of two1 adult males2 who are fit to testify regarding all matters.3Women and slaves,4 by contrast, are like other unacceptable witnesses and may not testify.
When a father and a son both see the new moon, they should both go the court to testify. Not because testimony regarding the [the sighting of] the new [moon] is acceptable [from witnesses who are] related, but because one of them may be disqualified because he is a thief or for other reasons, and the other will be able to join with another person and give testimony.
A person who is disqualified from serving as a witness by Rabbinical decree,5although he is acceptable according to the law of the Torah itself, may not serve as a witness with regard to [the sighting of] the new [moon].
Halacha 2
According to the law of the Torah, there is no need to be precise regarding testimony about [the sighting of] the new [moon]. For even if the new moon was sanctified on the basis of the testimony of witnesses, and later it was discovered that those witnesses had perjured themselves,6 [the new moon] remains sanctified.7
Accordingly, in the early generations, testimony regarding [the sighting of] the new [moon] was accepted from any Jew [without further enquiry], for any Jew can be presumed to be an acceptable witness unless one knows with certainty that he is unacceptable. When the followers of Baithos8 began conducting themselves in a debased manner and would hire people9 to testify that they had seen the moon when in fact they had not, the court decreed that it would accept testimony regarding [the sighting of] the new [moon] only from witnesses whom the court knew to be acceptable. Moreover, they would examine and question their testimony.
Halacha 3
Therefore, if the [High] Court did not know [the character of] the witnesses who sighted the moon, the inhabitants of the city where the moon was sighted would send other witnesses10 together with the witnesses who saw the moon to substantiate their character to the court, and inform [the judges] that they are acceptable [witnesses]. [Only] afterwards would the court accept their [testimony].
Halacha 4
The court would make calculations in a manner resembling the calculations of the astronomers, and would know whether the position of the moon - when it would be sighted - would be to the north of the sun, or to its south,11 if its [crescent] would be wide or narrow,12 and the direction in which its corners would be pointed.13
When the witnesses came to testify, they would ask them: "Where did you see [the moon]: to the north or to the south [of the sun]?", "In which direction were its corners pointed?", "How high and how wide did it appear to you?" If their replies were suitable, their testimony was accepted. If their replies were not suitable, their testimony was not accepted.
Halacha 5
If the witnesses say, "We saw [the reflection of the moon] in water," or "...[its form] behind the clouds," or "...[its reflection] in a mirror," [what they] saw is of no [consequence], and this sighting cannot be used as the basis for sanctifying [the new moon].14 [The same law applies if the witnesses say,] "We saw a portion [of the moon] in the heavens, and a portion of [its form] behind the clouds," "...a portion [reflected] in water," or "...a portion [reflected] in a mirror."
If one [potential witness says,] "I saw it and it appeared to me approximately two storeys high," and another [potential witness] says, "It was three storeys high," their testimonies may be combined15 [and the moon sanctified on this basis]. If, however, one says "It was approximately three storeys high," and the other says, "It was approximately five storeys high," their testimonies may not be joined together.16 Either one of them, however, may join together with another witness who gives identical testimony, or [who gives testimony] involving a discrepancy of merely one storey.
Halacha 6
If witnesses say, "We saw [the moon] without concentrating our attention, and, afterwards, when we concentrated our attention with the intent of sighting it so that we could testify, we did not see it," this is not considered [valid] testimony, and it cannot serve as the basis for sanctifying [the new moon]. Perhaps clouds came together, and appeared like the moon, and afterwards became dispersed.17
If witnesses say, "We saw [the moon] on the twenty-ninth [day] in the morning in the east before sunrise, and [afterwards,] in the evening, we saw it in the west on the thirtieth night," their testimony is believed, and the moon can be sanctified on this basis. [The rationale is] that they saw [the moon] at its appropriate time. [Their testimony] about [what they thought] they saw in the morning is disregarded. We need not pay any attention to what they saw in the morning, for it is obvious that it was the conjunction of clouds that appeared to them as the moon.18
Similarly, if [witnesses claim] to have seen the moon at its appropriate time, but it was not seen on the thirty-first night, their [testimony] is believed. For what is significant for us is only the sighting [of the moon] on the thirtieth night.19
Halacha 7
What is the process through which the testimony regarding the sighting of the moon is accepted? Anyone who saw the moon and is fit to testify20 should come to the court. The [judges] should bring them all to a single place,21 and should make a large feast for them, so that people will come regularly. The pair [of witnesses] who arrive first are examined first according to the questions mentioned previously.22 The one of greater stature is invited [into a private chamber] first and asked these questions. If his testimony is accurate according to [the data that the court arrives at through] calculations, they invite his colleague in. If their statements are comparable,23 their testimony is substantiated.
[Afterwards,] the remaining pairs are asked questions of a broader nature. [In truth,] their testimony is not required at all, [and they are being asked] only so they will not depart disheartened, so that they will come frequently [in the future].24
Halacha 8
Afterwards - i.e., after [the witnesses'] testimony is substantiated - the head of the court declares, "It has been sanctified." And all the people respond, "It has been sanctified. It has been sanctified."
A minimum of three judges is required to sanctify the new moon.25 Similarly, the calculations [regarding the moon's position] must be made by three judges. The new moon is sanctified only when it is sighted at its appropriate time.26Moreover, the moon is sanctified only during the day.27 If it was sanctified at night, the sanctification is of no consequence.
Furthermore, even if the court and the entire Jewish people saw the moon, but the court did not declare that "It has been sanctified"28 before the nightfall beginning the thirty-first day, or if the witnesses were cross-examined, but afterwards the court was not able to declare that "It has been sanctified" before the nightfall beginning the thirty-first day,29 it should not be sanctified,30 and the month should be full. Despite the fact that the moon was sighted on the thirtieth night, it is the thirty- first day that will be Rosh Chodesh. For [the sanctification of the new month] is not established by the sighting of the moon, but by the court that declares, "It has been sanctified."31
Halacha 9
If the court themselves see [the new moon] at the conclusion of the twenty-ninth day, before a star has emerged on the thirtieth night, the court may declare, "It has been sanctified; it has been sanctified,"32 for it is still day.33
If [the judges] sight the moon on the night of the thirtieth day after two stars have appeared,34 [they should adhere to the following procedure]. On the morrow, two other judges join one of the three [to form a court]. The other two [judges] then testify before [this court] of three, who then [sanctify the new month].
Halacha 10
Once the court sanctifies the new month, it remains sanctified regardless of whether they erred unwittingly, they were led astray [by false witnesses], or they were forced [to sanctify it].35 We are required to calculate [the dates of] the festivals based on the day that they sanctified [as the beginning of the new month].
Even if [a person] knows that [the court] erred, he is obligated to rely on them,36for the matter is entrusted to them alone. The One who commanded us to observe the festivals is the One who commanded [us] to rely on them, as [implied by Leviticus 23:2]: "Which you will pronounce as days of holy convocation."37
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
For all evidence must be substantiated by the testimony of two witnesses, as implied byDeuteronomy 19:15 which states, "The testimony of a single witness will not stand." See Hilchot Edut, ch. 5.
|
| 2. |
Both these concepts are implied by the Hebrew word anashim.
|
| 3. |
See Hilchot Edut, Chapters 9-10, 12-14.
|
| 4. |
Who are not acceptable for testimony in court (Hilchot Edut 9:2,4). The slaves referred to here are "Canaanite slaves," gentiles purchased as slaves. A Jewish servant, eved ivri, may give testimony in court on this and other matters.
|
| 5. |
E.g., gamblers, usurers, and other individuals described in Hilchot Edut, Chapter 11.
|
| 6. |
More particularly, the term used by the Rambam, zomemim refers to witnesses who claimed that they saw the moon while they were located in a specific place at a specific time, and later it was proven that they had been in another place at that time. (See Hilchot Edut, Chapter 18.)
|
| 7. |
See Halachah 10.
|
| 8. |
Avot D'Rabbi Natan 5:2 relates that Antigonus of Socho had two talented students, Tzadok and Baithos. When Antigonus taught: "Do not be like students serving a master in order to receive a reward," they turned away in disgust, commenting, "Is it proper for a worker to toil the entire day without receiving any recompense?"
They began splinter groups that rejected the core of Jewish practice and coveted material wealth. They found that they could not convince the majority of the people to reject the Torah entirely, so they adopted a different tactic. They claimed that they were true to Torah, but the only Torah that was Godly was the written law. The oral law, they maintained, was merely a human invention.
This thesis was only a ruse to sway the people from the performance of the mitzvot. Accordingly, the Sages would refer to all those who deny the Torah and its tradition as Sadducees (from Tzadok) or Baithosees (from Baithos) [the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Avot 1:3]. Not only did these individuals scorn Torah observance themselves, but they tried, as indicated by this halachah, to undermine the observance of the Jewish nation as a whole.
Our translation follows the standard printed text of the Mishneh Torah. Many original printings and manuscripts state minnim, "non-believers," rather than "the followers of Baithos." Similarly, the Rambam's source, Rosh HaShanah 2:1, uses this term. Some consider this as a reference to the early Christians.
|
| 9. |
Rosh HaShanah 22b relates that the Sadducees paid witnesses 400 zuzim to testify falsely with regard to the sighting of the moon.
|
| 10. |
The Rambam uses a plural term, implying that two character witnesses are required. This prerequisite is apparent from Rosh HaShanah 22b. The Jerusalem Talmud (Rosh HaShanah 2:1), by contrast, requires only one character witness.
|
| 11. |
As the Rambam states in his Commentary on the Mishnah, Rosh HaShanah 2:7, this refers to the latitude of the moon. This subject is explained in Chapter 16.
|
| 12. |
As the Rambam explains in his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the size of the moon's crescent grows as it moves further away from the sun.
|
| 13. |
See Chapter 19 for an explanation of how the court can determine these matters.
|
| 14. |
To sanctify the moon, it is necessary to see the moon itself - and not its reflection - and to see it clearly, not as it is hidden by clouds.
|
| 15. |
Although there is a discrepancy between them, the two testimonies are not considered to contradict each other, since it is possible for a person to err slightly in making such an estimation.
|
| 16. |
For this discrepancy is too great for the two to be considered a single statement.
|
| 17. |
Rosh HaShanah 24a and 25a mentions instances where the conjunction of the clouds appeared to resemble the moon.
|
| 18. |
The Rambam's statements are based on his interpretation of the difference of opinion between Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri mentioned in Rosh HaShanah 2:9. (See the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah for a detailed analysis of this matter.)
Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri maintains that the witnesses' testimony should be disregarded, because it cannot possibly be true. Everyone knows that, at the beginning of the month, the moon always appears on the western horizon for a brief period after the setting of the sun. At this time of the month, seeing it in the morning, before sunrise, is impossible. (See Chapters 15 and 17 for an explanation of this phenomenon.) Since the testimony of these witnesses contains an obvious error, the testimony should be disregarded entirely.
Rabban Gamliel, as his opinion is explained by the Rambam, was aware of this astronomical concept as well. Nevertheless, in the instance mentioned in the Mishnah, he knew that according to the calculations, it would have been possible for the moon to have been sighted on the night mentioned by the witnesses. Why then, he argued, should their testimony be discounted entirely because of the error they made regarding the morning. The fact that then, they mistook the condensation of clouds for the moon should not cause their testimony to be disregarded entirely.
|
| 19. |
This represents a parallel difference of opinion mentioned in Rosh HaShanah (op. cit.). Rabbi Dosa ben Hyrkanos maintains that it is impossible for the moon to be sighted on one night, and then for it not to be sighted on the following night.
Rabban Gamliel (as his position is explained by the Rambam in his Commentary on the Mishnah) accepted the witnesses' testimony in this instance, because he knew that, according to the calculations, it was possible for the moon to be sighted on the thirtieth night. The fact that it was not sighted again on the thirty-first night was merely a matter of circumstance: no one was trying to see it, their view was obstructed by clouds, or the like.
|
| 20. |
I.e., there is no benefit to be derived from a witness whose testimony will not be accepted by the court because of his conduct - e.g., a transgressor, a gambler, or a usurer.
|
| 21. |
Rosh HaShanah 23b states that there was a large courtyard in Jerusalem called "the house of Ya'azak" where the witnesses would gather.
|
| 22. |
In Halachah 4.
|
| 23. |
See Halachah 5.
|
| 24. |
The Rambam (based on Rosh HaShanah 2:7) is communicating an important lesson in human dynamics. Since the court might need these witnesses in the future, it is important that they feel that consideration is shown to them, and that their coming was not futile.
|
| 25. |
Rosh HaShanah 25b derives this concept as follows: The commandment "This month shall be for you..." was addressed to both Moses and Aaron, implying that at least two judges are necessary. A court must be composed of an odd number of judges, and hence a third judge is required.
|
| 26. |
I.e., as the Rambam continues to explain, for the new month to be sanctified, the moon must be sighted on the thirtieth night, the witnesses must testify on the thirtieth day, and the court must declare the month to be sanctified - all before sunset of that day.
|
| 27. |
Based on Psalms 81:4-5, Rosh HaShanah 25b draws an equation between the sighting of the new moon and the delivery of a judgment. Just as a judgment may be delivered only during the day, so too, the mitzvah of the sanctifying the new moon applies only by day.
|
| 28. |
In his Commentary on the Mishnah, Rosh HaShanah 3:1, the Rambam explains that one might think that since the court and the entire Jewish people saw the moon, there was no need to sanctify the new month. Therefore, as he concludes in this halachah, it is necessary to emphasize that it is the sanctification of the court that establishes the new month, and not the sighting of the moon alone.
|
| 29. |
Rosh HaShanah (loc. cit.) explains that although a decision regarding a monetary case may be rendered at night if the testimony was received by the court during the day, this concept does not apply regarding the sanctification of the new month. The court must actually sanctify the new month during the day.
|
| 30. |
Based on Chapter 3, Halachot 15-18, it would appear that the Rambam's intent is that, since the new month was not sanctified at its appropriate time, the court endeavors to have the witnesses' testimony disqualified. If, however, the witnesses' testimony is substantiated despite the court's efforts, the month can be sanctified retroactively.
|
| 31. |
As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 5, the mitzvah of sanctifying the new month has been entrusted to the court.
|
| 32. |
Rosh HaShanah 25b explains that this teaches us that hearing the testimony of the witnesses is not more effective than the actual sighting of the moon itself.
|
| 33. |
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Rosh HaShanah 3:1), the Rambam writes that although the sun has set, the night does not begin until the appearance of the stars, and it is still possible to sanctify the new moon.
(The Rambam's wording in this halachah and in the related portions of his Commentary on the Mishnah have raised questions concerning his conception of the limits of the day, the night, and the intermediate period referred to as beyn hash'mashot. See the Radbaz (Vol. V, Responsum 1379), the Ralbach, the Or Sameach and others, who address themselves to this issue.)
It is also significant to mention that Rashi (Rosh HaShanah, loc. cit.) and others differ with the Rambam's interpretation of the Mishnah, and consider it as referring to the citing of the moon at the conclusion of the thirtieth day, on the eve of the thirty- first.
|
| 34. |
From this time onward, they can no longer sanctify the new month on the basis of their sighting alone. Instead, the procedure outlined by the Rambam must be followed.
|
| 35. |
Significantly, instead of mentioning the court as being forced to sanctify the month on the wrong day, Rosh HaShanah 25a states "even if they purposefully sanctified the moon on the wrong day" - i.e., they accepted the testimony of witnesses even when they knew that it was flimsy. The Rambam chooses not to mention such an instance, and instead quotes the Mechilta D'Rashbi and the Sifra.
|
| 36. |
Rosh HaShanah 2:10 relates that once Rabbi Yehoshua differed with Rabban Gamliel concerning the acceptance of the testimony of witnesses with regard to Rosh HaShanah. Since Rabban Gamliel was the head of the High Court, his opinion was accepted. To emphasize the importance of following the necessity for uniform adherence to the decisions of the court, Rabban Gamliel ordered Rabbi Yehoshua to appear before him carrying his staff and his wallet on the day that Rabbi Yehoshua thought should be considered as Yom Kippur.
After consulting with his colleagues, Rabbi Yehoshua obeyed Rabban Gamliel's instructions. Afterwards, Rabban Gamliel honored Rabbi Yehoshua for his humility and deference to the court's authority.
|
| 37. |
אתם, meaning "which" in the above verse, can also mean "you," when vocalized differently. Thus, the authority of "you," the Jewish court to whom this matter is entrusted, is emphasized more powerfully (Rosh HaShanah, loc. cit.).
|
Korban Pesach - Perek 3
Halacha 1
The following rules apply when a person tells his servant: "Go and sacrifice a Paschal sacrifice for me." Even though his master usually slaughters a lamb every year and the servant slaughtered a goat - or his master would usually slaughter a goat and he went and slaughtered a lamb, the master may partake of it, since he did not explicitly say: "Slaughter this particular type."
If the servant went and slaughtered both a kid and a lamb, the master may not partake of either of them. Instead, they should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt, because one may not be enumerated on two Paschal sacrifices. If, however, it was a king or queen who told his servant to sacrifice an animal for him and the servant slaughtered a kid and a lamb, the king or queen may partake of the one slaughtered first. This leniency was granted to placate the king.
Halacha 2
When one tells his agent: "Go out and slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for me" and establishes that he wants either a kid or a lamb slaughtered, but the agent forgot what the principal told him, the agent should slaughter both a kid and a lamb and say: "If the principal told me to slaughter a kid, the kid should be his and the lamb, mine. If he told me to slaughter a lamb, the lamb should be his and the kid, mine."
In such a situation, if the principal also forgot what he told the agent, both animals should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt. If the principal forgot before the blood was cast on the altar, they are obligated to bring a second Paschal sacrifice. If he forgot after the blood was cast on the altar, he is exempt from bring a second Paschal sacrifice.
The same also applies if one tells a Canaanite servant: "Go and slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for me," and he established the type of sacrifice he desired and the servant forgot what his master told him, provided the shepherd of his master gives him a kid and a lamb and tells him: "Slaughter both of them so that you will have slaughtered one according to the instructions of your master. And one shall be yours on the condition that your master has no portion in it." If the shepherd does this, it will be possible for the servant to make the stipulation described above.
Halacha 3
The following rules apply if the members of a company tell a person: "Go and slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for us," and he tells them: "And you should slaughter for me." If they slaughtered an animal and he slaughtered an animal, they should eat from the animal slaughtered first and the one slaughtered last should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt.
Halacha 4
The following laws apply when the animal designated as a Paschal sacrifice of a company is lost and they tell one of the members of the company: "Go, search for it, and slaughter it for us." He went, found the Paschal sacrifice that was lost, and slaughtered it and they took another animal for a Paschal sacrifice and slaughtered it. If his was slaughtered first, he partakes of his sacrifice and they partake of it with him and the second one should be burnt. If theirs was slaughtered first, they should partake of their sacrifice and he should partake of his own. If it is not known which was slaughtered first or they were both slaughtered at the same time, he should partake of his own, but they should not eat with him. Their sacrifice should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt, but they are exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 5
The following laws apply when the agent told the members of the company who sent him to search for the Paschal sacrifice that was lost and to slaughter it: "If I come late, slaughter a Paschal sacrifice for me," and then he went found the lost animal and slaughtered it, but they also took another animal for a Paschal sacrifice and slaughtered it. If theirs is slaughtered first, they should partake of their own and he should eat with them. The second one should be burnt. If his is slaughtered first, he should partake of his own and they should partake of their own.If it is not known which was slaughtered first or they were both slaughtered at the same time, they should partake of theirs, but he does not partake of it with them. His sacrifice should be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt, but he is exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 6
The following laws apply if the Paschal sacrifice of a company was lost and the Paschal sacrifice of an individual was lost. He told them: "Go, search for it and slaughter for me" and they told him: "Go, search for it, and slaughter for us." If he went, found the lost animal, and slaughtered it and they went, found the lost animal, and slaughtered it, they should all eat from the first one slaughtered and the second should be burnt. If it is not known which was slaughtered first or they were both slaughtered them at the same time, they should both be burnt and they are all exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice.
If he went to search for the lost animal and they went to search for the lost animal, but they did not tell each other anything, neither one has any responsibility to the other. Since they said nothing explicitly and did not tell each other anything, this applies even if, in their hearts, they had the intent that each one would slaughter for the other and their were gestures and other matters from which it could assessed that they all agreed that whoever finds the lost animal should slaughter for the sake of the other.
Halacha 7
The following rules apply when the Paschal sacrifices of two companies become intermingled before they are slaughtered. One company takes one lamb from the mixture and the other takes the second. One of the members of one company should go to the other and one of the members of the second company should go the first. Each of the companies say to the person who came to join them: "If this Paschal sacrifice is ours, you are removed from your Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on ours. If, however, this Paschal sacrifice is yours, we are removed from our Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on yours."
Similarly, if there were five groups with at least five persons in each or ten groups of at least ten, a member of the every company is taken to each other company and such stipulations are made. Afterwards, they slaughter the sacrificial animals.
Halacha 8
When the Paschal sacrifices of two individuals become intermingled, one should take one of the Paschal sacrifices that are intermingled and the other should take the other. One should add another outsider to his Paschal sacrifice and the other should add an outsider, so that there be two companies. Afterwards, one of the two will go to the others and one of the others will go to the one and each one will stipulate with the person who came to him from the other company. Each should say: "If this Paschal sacrifice is mine, you are removed from your Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on mine. If, however, this Paschal sacrifice is yours, I am removed from our Paschal sacrifice and enumerated on yours." Thus no one has lost anything.
Halacha 9
When the hides of the Paschal sacrifices of five companies become intermingled and a disqualifying growth was discovered on the hide of one of them, all the sacrifices must be taken to the place where sacrifices are burnt. If they were intermingled before the blood was cast on the altar, they are all obligated to bring the second Paschal sacrifice.
If, however, the sacrificial animals became intermingled after the blood was cast, they are exempt from bringing the second Paschal sacrifice. For if they would offer a second Paschal sacrifice, the ones who offered an acceptable sacrifice on the first Pesach will be bringing non-sacrificial animals to the Temple Courtyard. If they would all be enumerated on one Paschal sacrifice, it would be slaughtered for those who are not obligated. That is equivalent to having it sacrificed for the sake of those who were not enumerated upon it. If each one of them brought a sacrifice for the second Paschal sacrifice and made a stipulation saying: "If it is not a Paschal sacrifice,it should be considered as a peace-offering," that is undesirable. For the blood of the Paschal sacrifice is poured on the altar, while the blood of a peace-offering is dashed and, as an initial preference, blood that should be dashed should not be poured. Hence they are exempt from a second Paschal sacrifice.
Korban Pesach - Perek 4
Halacha 1
We already explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim that a Paschal sacrifice is slaughtered only for the sake of a Paschal sacrificeand only for the sake of its owners. If it was slaughtered for the sake of another type of sacrifice, it is unacceptable.
When a person slaughters a Paschal sacrifice for the members of a company and, at a later time, told them: "That Paschal sacrifice that I slaughtered for you was not slaughtered with the proper intent," they should rely on his words if they consider him trustworthy. If not, according to the letter, his word is not accepted. If one desires to be stringent with himself and bring a second Paschal sacrifice, he is praiseworthy.
Halacha 2
When the meat of the Paschal sacrifice becomes impure and one becomes aware of this before the blood is poured on the altar, it should not be poured on the altar even though the fats and organs are pure. The rationale is that the Paschal sacrifice is offered only with the intent that it be eaten. If the blood is poured on the altar, it is not acceptable.
If one does not become aware until the blood was poured, it is acceptable. For the High Priest's forehead plate generates appeasement for blood offered unintentionally when meat became impure, but it does not generate appeasement for intentional violation.
If a portion of the limbs of the Paschal sacrifice become impure, he should burn those which became impure and partake of those which are pure. If the fats and organs become impure while the meat is intact, the blood should be poured and the meat eaten in the evening.
If the owners become impure after the Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered, the blood should not be poured. If it is poured, it is not acceptable. Therefore they are obligated to bring a second Paschal sacrifice. For the High Priest's forehead plate does generate appeasement for bodily impurity unless the person became impure due to "impurity likened to the depths," as we explained inHilchot Bi'at HaMikdash.
Halacha 3
When a Paschal sacrifice was taken out of Jerusalem or it became impure on the fourteenth of Nisan, it should be burnt immediately. When the owners became impure, died, or remove themselves - even if they became impure or died before the blood was poured on the altar - it should be left overnight and burnt afterwards.
This is the general principle: Whenever there is a disqualifying factor involving the actual body of the sacrifice, it should be burnt immediately. If the disqualifying factor involves the blood or the owners, it should be left overnight and then burnt. Therefore if it was slaughtered after it was known that the owners removed themselves from the sacrifice, died, or became impure and thus their obligation was postponed until the second Pesach, their first Paschal sacrifice should be burnt immediately.
When does the statement that the Paschal sacrifice should be burnt if the owners become impure apply? When all of the members of the company become impure. If, however, only some of them become impure, those who remain pure acquire the portions of those who became impure. Even if those who became impure incurred their impurity after they began eating, those who were pure who did not begin eating as of yet, acquire their portion.
If, however, all of them began eating and some of them became impure, those who remain pure do not acquire the portions of those who became impure. Instead, those who remain pure should partake of their portions and the portions of those who became impure should be burnt. This also applies if a portion of the owners died.
If the Paschal sacrifice became impure after those impure began eating, those who remained pure acquire their portions. If, however, they all had begun to eat and some of them became impure, those who remained pure do not acquire the portions of those who became impure. Instead, those who remained pure should eat their own portion and the portions of those who became impure should be burnt. These same laws apply if some of those enumerated on the sacrifice died.
If the entire Paschal sacrifice or its majority becomes impure, it should be burnt in front of the Temple in the presence of everyone to embarrass its owners, so that in the future they will show greater care. It should be burnt with wood designated for the altar so that suspicion about them will not be aroused and it be said: "They stole wood designated for the altar." Therefore if they burn it with straw and reeds and desire to burn it with their own straw, they may.
If less than half of it became impure and similarly, any meat left over from the Paschal sacrifice should be burnt in their own courtyards from their own wood. Wood designated for the altar should not be used, so that it will not remain in their possession and they misappropriate it.
Halacha 4
If one set aside a female animal for his Paschal sacrifice or a male animal in its second or third year of life, it should be allowed to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish. Then it should be sold and a Paschal sacrifice brought with the proceeds of the sale. If it did not contract a blemish until after he offered his Paschal sacrifice, he should bring a peace-offering with the proceeds of the sale.
Halacha 5
When a person sets aside a Paschal sacrifice and dies, his son should not bring it afterwards as a Paschal sacrifice, but as a peace-offering. If the son was enumerated on the Paschal sacrifice together with his father, he may bring it as a Paschal sacrifice.
When does the above apply? When his father dies after midday on the fourteenth of Nisan. If, however, he died before midday on the fourteenth, the son is deferred to the second Pesach, because he is in the acute state of onainmourning, as will be explained. He should bring this animal as a Paschal sacrifice on the second Pesach.
Halacha 6
The following laws apply if a person's Paschal sacrifice was lost and then he found it after he set aside another Paschal sacrifice and they are both standing before him. He should sacrifice whichever one he desires for the sake of a Paschal sacrifice and the other should be offered as a peace-offering.
If he finds it after he slaughtered another animal as a Paschal sacrifice, the one that he found should be offered as a peace-offering. Similarly, if he transferred the holinessof the animal he found after the slaughter of its replacement, the animal unto which the holiness was transferred should be sacrificed as a peace-offering. If, however, he found it before the other he set aside was slaughtered, different rules apply. Since the animal that was found is fit to be offered as a Paschal sacrifice and it is fit to be offered as a peace-offering, as explained above, if he transferred the holiness of the animal that was found whether before the slaughter of the one designated in its place or afterwards, the animal to which its holiness is transferred is not sacrificed. Instead, it is left to pasture until it contracts a blemish. Then a peace-offering is brought with the proceeds of its sale.
Halacha 7
An animal designated as a Paschal sacrifice that becomes more than a year old or a peace-offering brought from an animal that was originally designated as Paschal sacrifice is considered as a peace-offering in all contexts. It requiressemichah, accompanying offerings, and the waving of the breast and thigh. These requirements do not apply with regard to the Paschal sacrifice.
Halacha 8
When an animal designated as a Paschal sacrifice becomes intermingled with animals designated as peace-offerings, they should all be brought as peace-offerings.If it became intermingled with an animal designated as another type of offering, the two should be allowed to pasture until they contract disqualifying physical blemishes. An animal equivalent to the value of the more expensive of the two should be brought for each type of sacrifice and the owner should forfeit the remainder from his resources, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.
If a Paschal sacrifice becomes intermingled with firstborn animals, they should be allowed to pasture until they contract disqualifying physical blemishes and then they should be eaten according to the laws pertaining to a blemished firstborn animal.And he should bring an animal equivalent to the most valuable one in the mixture and say: "Wherever the Paschal sacrifice is, its holiness should be transferred to this animal." That animal should be brought as a peace-offering if his Paschal sacrifice was already offered.
Halacha 9
When one sets aside an animal for a Paschal sacrifice before he converts and then converts or a Canaanite servant sets one aside before he is freed and then he is freed, or a child sets one aside before he manifests signs of physical maturity and then he manifests them, he may offer it for the sake of a Paschal sacrifice. The rationale is that living animals are not deemed unacceptable forever, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim.
Halacha 10
If one set aside money for his Paschal sacrifice and there was some left over, he should use the remainder for a peace-offering. If someone enumerates others on his Paschal sacrifice and festive offering, the money he takes from them for their portion is considered as ordinary funds. Even though this one set aside a lamb for his Paschal sacrifice and this one set aside money, and the one took that money and enumerated the other on his Paschal sacrifice, the money is considered as ordinary funds. For the Jews consecrated their Paschal sacrifices and festive offerings and the money for their Paschal sacrifices and festive offerings with this stipulation.
Halacha 11
The wood used for roasting the Paschal sacrifice is equivalent to the Paschal sacrifice. Similarly, the matzah and bitter herbs, since they are necessary elements for the Paschal sacrifice, are equivalent to the Paschal sacrifice. If one took money from the money for the Paschal sacrifice from someone who was enumerated with him to enumerate him on the matzah and the bitter herbs or so that he will own a portion of the wood used to roast it, the money is considered as ordinary funds.
Korban Pesach - Perek 5
Halacha 1
When someone was impure at the time of the slaughter of the Paschal sacrifice and the Paschal sacrifice could not be slaughtered for him,was "on a distant way," he was prevented because of other reasons, or inadvertently failed to offer the first Paschal sacrifice, he should bring a Paschal sacrifice on the fourteenth of the second month in the afternoon. Slaughtering this Paschal sacrifice is an independent positive commandment and supersedes the Sabbath prohibitions. For the second Pesach is not compensation for the first, but an independent festival. Therefore one is liable for karet for failing to bring the sacrifice.
Halacha 2
What is implied? If a person inadvertently or because of forces beyond his control failed to offer the first Paschal sacrifice, if he intentionally refrained from offering the second, he is liable for karet. If he inadvertently did not offer the second Paschal sacrifice or was held back due to forces beyond his control, he is exempt from karet. If he intentionally did not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, he may offer the second. If he did not offer the second Paschal sacrifice, even if his lapse was unintentional, he is liable for karet. The rationale is that he did not offer God's sacrifice at the appointed time and was willful in his omission. If, however, he was impure or "on a distant way" and did not offer the first Paschal sacrifice, he is not liable for karet even though he willfully did not bring the second. The rationale is that on the first Pesach, he was already exempt fromkaret.
Halacha 3
When someone was "on a distant way" on the fourteenth of Nisan, but the Paschal sacrifice was nevertheless sacrificed on his behalf and the blood was poured on the altar for him, it is not accepted and he is obligated to offer a second Paschal sacrifice even though he came in the evening.
Halacha 4
When a person is impure, but could purify himself to partake of the first Paschal sacrifice, and yet refrains from immersing himself and instead, remains in a state of impurity until the time for offering the sacrifices passes, he is considered as having intentionally failed to sacrifice the first Paschal sacrifice. This ruling also applies to an uncircumcised person who does not circumcise himself until the time for the sacrifice passes. Therefore if these individuals do not offer the second Paschal sacrifice - even if their failure to do so is inadvertent - they are liable for karet.
Halacha 5
Just as the failure to circumcise oneself holds a person back from offering the Paschal sacrifice, so too, the failure to circumcise one's children below the age of majority and the failure to circumcise all of one's Canaanite servants, whether above majority or below majority, holds him back, as Exodus 12:48states: "He shall circumcise all males, then he will draw close to offer it." If one offered the Paschal sacrifice before circumcising the above individuals, the Paschal sacrifices is invalidated.
Similarly, the immersion of one's Canaanite maidservants in a mikveh for the sake of servitude holds one back from offering the Paschal sacrifice. This matter is part of the received tradition: immersion for maidservants is equivalent to circumcision for servants.
Halacha 6
The circumcision of his servants and the immersion of his maidservants does not prevent a minor from being enumerated on a Paschal sacrifice, as indicated by ibid.:44: "Any servant of a man." This excludes a minor.
Halacha 7
A convert who converts between the first Pesach and the second Pesach and similarly, a child who comes of age between these two holidays are obligated to offer the second Paschal sacrifice. If one slaughtered the first Paschal sacrifice for the sake of the minor, the minor is exempt from bringing the second sacrifice.
Halacha 8
When the obligation of women is postponed until the second Pesach, whether because of forces beyond their control, inadvertent omission, impurity, or because they were "on a distant way," offering the second Paschal sacrifice is optional for them. If they desire, they may have the offering slaughtered; if they do not desire, they don't. Therefore one should not slaughter a Paschal sacrifice only for women when the second Pesach falls on the Sabbath. If, however, a woman is part of the company offering a second Paschal sacrifice, it is permitted.
What is meant by the term "on a distant way" which exempts a person from bringing a Paschal sacrifice? Fifteen mil outside the walls of Jerusalem.
Halacha 9
If one was fifteen mil or more outside of Jerusalem at the appearance of the sun on the fourteenth Nisan, he is considered to be "on a distant way." If he was closer than this, he is not considered to be "on a distant way," because he could reach Jerusalem after midday while walking comfortably by foot.
If he journeyed and did not reach Jerusalem in time, because he was held back by a press of animals or he was in Jerusalem, but was infirm in his legs and did not reach the Temple Courtyard until the time for the offering of the sacrifice passed, he is considered as having been held back by forces beyond his control, but not "on a distant way."
If someone was imprisoned outside the walls of Jerusalem and was promised to be released in the evening, the offering may be slaughtered on his behalf and when he is released in the evening, he may partake of it.
When does the above apply? When he was imprisoned by Jews. If, by contrast, he was imprisoned by gentiles, the Paschal sacrifice should not be slaughtered on his behalf until he is released. If, however, it was slaughtered on his behalf and he was released, he may partake of it. If he was not released, he is exempt from bringing a second Paschal sacrifice, since the sacrifice was slaughtered on his behalf.
Similar laws apply when a Paschal sacrifice was slaughtered for a person in the acute state of onain mourning, for an invalid, or for an elderly person who could have partaken of the sacrifice who became impure after the blood was poured on the altar and thus they are no longer able to partake of it. They are exempt from offering the second Paschal sacrifice.
• Friday, Sivan 25, 5775 · 12 June 2015
"Today's Day"
Torah lessons: Chumash: Korach, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 119, 1-96.
Tanya: And this is stated (p. 315)...He fills them. (p. 315).
"A care in a man's heart, yash'chena."1 Our sages offer2 two interpretations of that last word: "Remove the care from the mind"3 or "discuss it with others."4
The Tzemach Tzedek commented: "...with others" who are "others" only in the bodily sense, but are completely united with him, for they empathize with him.
FOOTNOTES
1. Mishlei 12:25.
2. Yoma 75a.
3. Reading yasichena, from the expression yasiach da'at "forget" or "turn one's mind away."
4. Reading yesichena, "talk," "discuss."Daily Thought:
The Taller They Are...
You might think that divine sparks are meted out by simple protocol: The lowlier the creation, the lowlier the divine spark it holds.
Just the opposite: Only the highest sparks could descend to the lowest places and retain their power to sustain a being.
Those are the sparks remaining to be rescued today.[Likkutei Torah, Tzav 13b and Re’eh 19c. Maamar Beshaah She’alah 5729:6.]
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment