Daily Quote:
Someone once said to my father, "The Alter Rebbe's chassidim were always keeping count." My father took a great liking to the saying, and he commented: "That idea characterizes a person's service of G-d. The hours must be 'counted hours,' then the days will be 'counted days.' When a day passes one should know what he has accomplished and what remains yet to be done... In general, one should always see to it that tomorrow should be much better than today."[Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch (Hayom Yom, Iyar 1)]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Eikev, 3rd Portion Deuteronomy 9:4-9:29 with Rashi
• Chapter 9
4Do not say to yourself, when the Lord, your God, has repelled them from before you, saying, "Because of my righteousness, the Lord has brought me to possess this land," and [that] because of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord drives them out from before you. דאַל תֹּאמַר בִּלְבָבְךָ בַּהֲדֹף יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֹתָם | מִלְּפָנֶיךָ לֵאמֹר בְּצִדְקָתִי הֱבִיאַנִי יְהֹוָה לָרֶשֶׁת אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת וּבְרִשְׁעַת הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵלֶּה יְהֹוָה מוֹרִישָׁם מִפָּנֶיךָ:
Do not say to yourself: “My righteousness and the nations’ evil brought it about.” אל תאמר בלבבך: צדקתי ורשעת הגוים גרמו:
5Not because of your righteousness or because of the honesty of your heart, do you come to possess their land, but because of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord your God drives them out from before you, and in order to establish the matter that the Lord swore to your forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. הלֹא בְצִדְקָתְךָ וּבְישֶׁר לְבָבְךָ אַתָּה בָא לָרֶשֶׁת אֶת אַרְצָם כִּי בְּרִשְׁעַת | הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵלֶּה יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מוֹרִישָׁם מִפָּנֶיךָ וּלְמַעַן הָקִים אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְהֹוָה לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ לְאַבְרָהָם לְיִצְחָק וּלְיַעֲקֹב:
for the wickedness of these nations: Here [the word] כִּי means“but.” [See Rashi on Deut. 7:17.] לא בצדקתך וגו' אתה בא לרשת וגו' כי ברשעת הגוים: הרי כי משמש בלשון אלא:
6You shall know that, not because of your righteousness, the Lord, your God, gives you this land to possess it; for you are a stiffnecked people. ווְיָדַעְתָּ כִּי לֹא בְצִדְקָתְךָ יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַטּוֹבָה הַזֹּאת לְרִשְׁתָּהּ כִּי עַם קְשֵׁה עֹרֶף אָתָּה:
7Remember do not forget, how you angered the Lord, your God, in the desert; from the day that you went out of the land of Egypt, until you came to this place, you have been rebelling against the Lord. זזְכֹר אַל תִּשְׁכַּח אֵת אֲשֶׁר הִקְצַפְתָּ אֶת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בַּמִּדְבָּר לְמִן הַיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר יָצָאתָ | מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם עַד בֹּאֲכֶם עַד הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה מַמְרִים הֱיִיתֶם עִם יְהֹוָה:
8At Horeb, you angered the Lord, and the Lord was incensed with you to destroy you. חוּבְחֹרֵב הִקְצַפְתֶּם אֶת יְהֹוָה וַיִּתְאַנַּף יְהֹוָה בָּכֶם לְהַשְׁמִיד אֶתְכֶם:
9When I ascended the mountain to receive the stone tablets, the tablets of the covenant which the Lord made with you, I remained on the mountain forty days and forty nights; I neither ate bread nor drank water; טבַּעֲלֹתִי הָהָרָה לָקַחַת לוּחֹת הָאֲבָנִים לוּחֹת הַבְּרִית אֲשֶׁר כָּרַת יְהֹוָה עִמָּכֶם וָאֵשֵׁב בָּהָר אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וְאַרְבָּעִים לַיְלָה לֶחֶם לֹא אָכַלְתִּי וּמַיִם לֹא שָׁתִיתִי:
I remained on the mountain: Heb. וָאֵשֵׁב. The word יְשִׁיבָה means“staying” [i.e., I stayed on the mountain]. — [Meg. 21a] ואשב בהר: אין ישיבה אלא לשון עכבה:
10and the Lord gave me two stone tablets, inscribed by the finger of God, and on them was [inscribed] according to all the words that the Lord spoke with you on the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly. יוַיִּתֵּן יְהֹוָה אֵלַי אֶת שְׁנֵי לוּחֹת הָאֲבָנִים כְּתֻבִים בְּאֶצְבַּע אֱלֹהִים וַעֲלֵיהֶם כְּכָל הַדְּבָרִים אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְהֹוָה עִמָּכֶם בָּהָר מִתּוֹךְ הָאֵשׁ בְּיוֹם הַקָּהָל:
tablets: [This word] is written לוּחֹת [in a singular form, and not, לוּחוֹת, to indicate that] both of them were identical. — [Tanchuma 10] לוחת: לוחת כתיב, ששתיהם שוות:
11And it came to pass at the end of forty days and forty nights, that the Lord gave me two stone tablets, the tablets of the covenant. יאוַיְהִי מִקֵּץ אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וְאַרְבָּעִים לָיְלָה נָתַן יְהֹוָה אֵלַי אֶת שְׁנֵי לֻחֹת הָאֲבָנִים לֻחוֹת הַבְּרִית:
12And the Lord said to me, "Arise, descend quickly from here, for your people whom you have brought out of Egypt have become corrupt; they have quickly deviated from the way which I commanded them; they have made for themselves a molten image." יבוַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֵלַי קוּם רֵד מַהֵר מִזֶּה כִּי שִׁחֵת עַמְּךָ אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתָ מִמִּצְרָיִם סָרוּ מַהֵר מִן הַדֶּרֶךְ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִם עָשׂוּ לָהֶם מַסֵּכָה:
13And the Lord spoke to me [further], saying, "I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people. יגוַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֵלַי לֵאמֹר רָאִיתִי אֶת הָעָם הַזֶּה וְהִנֵּה עַם קְשֵׁה עֹרֶף הוּא:
14Leave Me alone, and I will destroy them and obliterate their name from beneath the heavens, and I will make you into a nation mightier and more numerous than they." ידהֶרֶף מִמֶּנִּי וְאַשְׁמִידֵם וְאֶמְחֶה אֶת שְׁמָם מִתַּחַת הַשָּׁמָיִם וְאֶעֱשֶׂה אוֹתְךָ לְגוֹי עָצוּם וָרָב מִמֶּנּוּ:
15So I turned and came down from the mountain, and the mountain was burning with fire, and the two tablets of the covenant were on my two hands. טווָאֵפֶן וָאֵרֵד מִן הָהָר וְהָהָר בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ וּשְׁנֵי לוּחֹת הַבְּרִית עַל שְׁתֵּי יָדָי:
16And I saw, and behold, you had sinned against the Lord, your God; you had made yourselves a molten calf; you had deviated quickly from the way which the Lord had commanded you. טזוָאֵרֶא וְהִנֵּה חֲטָאתֶם לַיהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם עֲשִׂיתֶם לָכֶם עֵגֶל מַסֵּכָה סַרְתֶּם מַהֵר מִן הַדֶּרֶךְ אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה אֶתְכֶם:
17So I grasped the two tablets, cast them out of my two hands, and shattered them before your eyes. יזוָאֶתְפֹּשׂ בִּשְׁנֵי הַלֻּחֹת וָאַשְׁלִכֵם מֵעַל שְׁתֵּי יָדָי וָאֲשַׁבְּרֵם לְעֵינֵיכֶם:
18And I fell down before the Lord as before, forty days and forty nights; I neither ate bread nor drank water, because of all your sins you had committed, by doing evil in the eyes of the Lord to anger Him. יחוָאֶתְנַפַּל לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה כָּרִאשֹׁנָה אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וְאַרְבָּעִים לַיְלָה לֶחֶם לֹא אָכַלְתִּי וּמַיִם לֹא שָׁתִיתִי עַל כָּל חַטַּאתְכֶם אֲשֶׁר חֲטָאתֶם לַעֲשׂוֹת הָרַע בְּעֵינֵי יְהֹוָה לְהַכְעִיסוֹ:
And I fell down before the Lord, as before, forty days: As it says, “And now I will go up to the Lord, perhaps I will atone [for the golden calf]” (Exod. 32:20). At that ascent, I stayed there forty days; consequently, these ended on the twenty-ninth of Av, since he [Moses] ascended on the eighteenth of Tammuz. On the same day, God was reconciled with Israel and He said to Moses, “Hew for yourself two tablets” (Exod. 34:1). He [Moses] remained there another forty days; consequently, these ended on Yom Kippur [the tenth of Tishri]. On that very day, the Holy One, blessed is He, was joyfully reconciled with Israel, and He said to Moses, “I have forgiven according to your words” (Num. 14:20). Therefore [Yom Kippur] was designated [as a day] for pardon and forgiveness. And from where do we know that [God] was reconciled [with Israel] in complete acceptance? Because it says referring to the forty [days] of the later tablets, “And I remained on the mountain as the first days” (Deut. 10:10). Just as the first [forty days] were with [God’s] good will, so too, the last [forty days] were with [God’s] good will. We may now deduce that the intermediate [forty days] were with [God’s] anger. — [Seder Olam , ch. 6] ואתנפל לפני ה' כראשונה ארבעים יום: שנאמר (שמות לב, ל) ועתה אעלה אל ה' אולי אכפרה. באותה עלייה נתעכבתי ארבעים יום. נמצאו כלים בכ"ט באב. שהוא עלה בשמונה עשר בתמוז, בו ביום נתרצה הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל ואמר לו למשה (דברים י, א) פסל לך שני לוחות, עשה עוד ארבעים יום, נמצאו כלים ביום הכפורים. בו ביום נתרצה הקב"ה לישראל בשמחה ואמר לו למשה (במדבר יד, כ) סלחתי כדברך. לכך הוקבע למחילה ולסליחה. ומנין שנתרצה ברצון שלם, שנאמר בארבעים של לוחות אחרונות (דברים י, י) ואנכי עמדתי בהר כימים הראשונים, מה הראשונים ברצון אף אחרונים ברצון, אמור מעתה אמצעיים היו בכעס:
19For I was frightened of the wrath and the fury that the Lord was angry with you to destroy you, and the Lord hearkened to me also at that time. יטכִּי יָגֹרְתִּי מִפְּנֵי הָאַף וְהַחֵמָה אֲשֶׁר קָצַף יְהֹוָה עֲלֵיכֶם לְהַשְׁמִיד אֶתְכֶם וַיִּשְׁמַע יְהֹוָה אֵלַי גַּם בַּפַּעַם הַהִוא:
20And with Aaron, the Lord was very furious, to destroy him; so I prayed also for Aaron at that time. כוּבְאַהֲרֹן הִתְאַנַּף יְהֹוָה מְאֹד לְהַשְׁמִידוֹ וָאֶתְפַּלֵּל גַּם בְּעַד אַהֲרֹן בָּעֵת הַהִוא:
And with Aaron, the Lord was very furious: Because he listened to you. ובאהרן התאנף ה': לפי ששמע לכם:
to destroy him: This refers to the destruction of [his] children. Similarly, it states, “And I destroyed his fruit [i.e., children] from above” (Amos 2:9). - [Pesikta Rabbathi, Acharei Moth] להשמידו: זה כלוי בנים. וכן הוא אומר (עמוס ב, ט) ואשמיד פריו ממעל:
so I prayed also for Aaron: And my prayer succeeded to atone for half, thus [only] two [of his sons] died, and two remained [alive]. ואתפלל גם בעד אהרן: והועילה תפלתי לכפר מחצה, ומתו שנים ונשארו השנים:
21And I took your sin the calf, which you had made, and I burned it with fire, and I crushed it, grinding it well, until it was fine dust, and I cast its dust into the brook that descends from the mountain. כאוְאֶת חַטַּאתְכֶם אֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם אֶת הָעֵגֶל לָקַחְתִּי וָאֶשְׂרֹף אֹתוֹ | בָּאֵשׁ וָאֶכֹּת אֹתוֹ טָחוֹן הֵיטֵב עַד אֲשֶׁר דַּק לְעָפָר וָאַשְׁלִךְ אֶת עֲפָרוֹ אֶל הַנַּחַל הַיֹּרֵד מִן הָהָר:
grinding: Heb. טָחוֹן. This is the present tense [of the verb], like הָלוֹךְ וְגָדֵל, “continuously growing” (Gen. 26:13), moulant in French, grinding. טחון: לשון הווה כמו (בראשית כו, יג) הלוך וגדל מולאנ"ט בלע"ז [בטחנו]:
22And at Tav'erah, and at Massah, and at Kivroth Hata'avah, you provoked the Lord to anger. כבוּבְתַבְעֵרָה וּבְמַסָּה וּבְקִבְרֹת הַתַּאֲוָה מַקְצִפִים הֱיִיתֶם אֶת יְהֹוָה:
23And when the Lord sent you from Kadesh Barnea, saying, "Go up and possess the land I have given you," you defied the word of the Lord your God, and you did not believe Him, nor did you obey Him. כגוּבִשְׁלֹחַ יְהֹוָה אֶתְכֶם מִקָּדֵשׁ בַּרְנֵעַ לֵאמֹר עֲלוּ וּרְשׁוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לָכֶם וַתַּמְרוּ אֶת פִּי יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וְלֹא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם לוֹ וְלֹא שְׁמַעְתֶּם בְּקֹלוֹ:
24You have been rebelling against the Lord since the day I became acquainted with you. כדמַמְרִים הֱיִיתֶם עִם יְהֹוָה מִיּוֹם דַּעְתִּי אֶתְכֶם:
25So I fell down before the Lord the forty days and the forty nights that I had fallen down; because the Lord had said to destroy you. כהוָאֶתְנַפַּל לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָה אֵת אַרְבָּעִים הַיּוֹם וְאֶת אַרְבָּעִים הַלַּיְלָה אֲשֶׁר הִתְנַפָּלְתִּי כִּי אָמַר יְהֹוָה לְהַשְׁמִיד אֶתְכֶם:
And I fell down [before the Lord the forty days… which I had fallen down]: These are the same [forty days] mentioned above (verse 18). And it is repeated here because now the content of his prayer is written, as it is stated [in the next verse],“O Lord God, do not destroy Your people, etc.” ואתנפל וגו': אלו הן עצמם האמורים למעלה (פסוק יח) וכפלן כאן, לפי שכתוב כאן סדר תפלתו, שנאמר (פסוק כו) ה' אלהים אל תשחת עמך וגו':
26And I prayed to the Lord and said, "O Lord God, do not destroy Your people and Your inheritance, which You have redeemed in Your greatness, and which You have brought out of Egypt with mighty hand. כווָאֶתְפַּלֵּל אֶל יְהֹוָה וָאֹמַר אֲדֹנָי יֱהֹוִה אַל תַּשְׁחֵת עַמְּךָ וְנַחֲלָתְךָ אֲשֶׁר פָּדִיתָ בְּגָדְלֶךָ אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתָ מִמִּצְרַיִם בְּיָד חֲזָקָה:
27Remember your servants, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; do not turn to the stubbornness of this people, to their wickedness, or to their sin. כזזְכֹר לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לְאַבְרָהָם לְיִצְחָק וּלְיַעֲקֹב אַל תֵּפֶן אֶל קְשִׁי הָעָם הַזֶּה וְאֶל רִשְׁעוֹ וְאֶל חַטָּאתוֹ:
28Lest [the people of] the land from which you brought us out will say, 'Because of the Lord's inability to bring them to the land about which He spoke to them, and because of His hatred toward them, He has brought them out to slay them in the desert.' כחפֶּן יֹאמְרוּ הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתָנוּ מִשָּׁם מִבְּלִי יְכֹלֶת יְהֹוָה לַהֲבִיאָם אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר לָהֶם וּמִשִּׂנְאָתוֹ אוֹתָם הוֹצִיאָם לַהֲמִתָם בַּמִּדְבָּר:
29But they are Your people and Your inheritance, which You brought out with Your great strength and with Your outstretched arm." כטוְהֵם עַמְּךָ וְנַחֲלָתֶךָ אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתָ בְּכֹחֲךָ הַגָּדֹל וּבִזְרֹעֲךָ הַנְּטוּיָה:Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 90 - 96
• Chapter 90
David found this prayer in its present form-receiving a tradition attributing it to MosesThe Midrash attributes the next eleven psalms to Moses (Rashi).-and incorporated it into the Tehillim. It speaks of the brevity of human life, and inspires man to repent and avoid pride in this world.
1. A prayer by Moses, the man of God. My Lord, You have been a shelter for us in every generation.
2. Before the mountains came into being, before You created the earth and the world-for ever and ever You are Almighty God.
3. You diminish man until he is crushed, and You say, "Return, you children of man.”
4. Indeed, a thousand years are in Your eyes like yesterday that has passed, like a watch of the night.
5. The stream of their life is as but a slumber; in the morning they are like grass that sprouts anew.
6. In the morning it thrives and sprouts anew; in the evening it withers and dries.
7. For we are consumed by Your anger, and destroyed by Your wrath.
8. You have set our wrongdoings before You, our hidden sins before the light of Your countenance.
9. For all our days have vanished in Your wrath; we cause our years to pass like a fleeting sound.
10. The days of our lives number seventy years, and if in great vigor, eighty years; most of them are but travail and futility, passing quickly and flying away.
11. Who can know the intensity of Your anger? Your wrath is commensurate with one's fear of You.
12. Teach us, then, to reckon our days, that we may acquire a wise heart.
13. Relent, O Lord; how long [will Your anger last]? Have compassion upon Your servants.
14. Satiate us in the morning with Your kindness, then we shall sing and rejoice throughout our days.
15. Give us joy corresponding to the days You afflicted us, the years we have seen adversity.
16. Let Your work be revealed to Your servants, and Your splendor be upon their children.
17. May the pleasantness of the Lord our God be upon us; establish for us the work of our hands; establish the work of our hands.
Chapter 91
This psalm inspires the hearts of the people to seek shelter under the wings of the Divine Presence. It also speaks of the four seasons of the year, and their respective ministering powers, instructing those who safeguard their souls to avoid them.
1. You who dwells in the shelter of the Most High, who abides in the shadow of the Omnipotent:
2. I say of the Lord who is my refuge and my stronghold, my God in whom I trust,
3. that He will save you from the ensnaring trap, from the destructive pestilence.
4. He will cover you with His pinions and you will find refuge under His wings; His truth is a shield and an armor.
5. You will not fear the terror of the night, nor the arrow that flies by day;
6. the pestilence that prowls in the darkness, nor the destruction that ravages at noon.
7. A thousand may fall at your [left] side, and ten thousand at your right, but it shall not reach you.
8. You need only look with your eyes, and you will see the retribution of the wicked.
9. Because you [have said,] "The Lord is my shelter," and you have made the Most High your haven,
10. no evil will befall you, no plague will come near your tent.
11. For He will instruct His angels in your behalf, to guard you in all your ways.
12. They will carry you in their hands, lest you injure your foot upon a rock.
13. You will tread upon the lion and the viper; you will trample upon the young lion and the serpent.
14. Because he desires Me, I will deliver him; I will fortify him, for he knows My Name.
15. When he calls on Me, I will answer him; I am with him in distress. I will deliver him and honor him.
16. I will satiate him with long life, and show him My deliverance.
Chapter 92
Sung every Shabbat by the Levites in the Holy Temple, this psalm speaks of the World to Come, and comforts the hearts of those crushed by suffering.
1. A psalm, a song for the Shabbat day.
2. It is good to praise the Lord, and to sing to Your Name, O Most High;
3. to proclaim Your kindness in the morning, and Your faithfulness in the nights,
4. with a ten-stringed instrument and lyre, to the melody of a harp.
5. For You, Lord, have gladdened me with Your deeds; I sing for joy at the works of Your hand.
6. How great are Your works, O Lord; how very profound Your thoughts!
7. A brutish man cannot know, a fool cannot comprehend this:
8. When the wicked thrive like grass, and all evildoers flourish-it is in order that they may be destroyed forever.
9. But You, Lord, are exalted forever.
10. Indeed, Your enemies, O Lord, indeed Your enemies shall perish; all evildoers shall be scattered.
11. But You have increased my might like that of a wild ox; I am anointed with fresh oil.
12. My eyes have seen [the downfall of] my watchful enemies; my ears have heard [the doom of] the wicked who rise against me.
13. The righteous will flourish like a palm tree, grow tall like a cedar in Lebanon.
14. Planted in the House of the Lord, they shall blossom in the courtyards of our God.
15. They shall be fruitful even in old age; they shall be full of sap and freshness-
16. to declare that the Lord is just; He is my Strength, and there is no injustice in Him.
Chapter 93
This psalm speaks of the Messianic era, when God will don grandeur-allowing no room for man to boast before Him as did Nebuchadnezzar, Pharaoh, and Sennacherib.
1. The Lord is King; He has garbed Himself with grandeur; the Lord has robed Himself, He has girded Himself with strength; He has also established the world firmly that it shall not falter.
2. Your throne stands firm from of old; You have existed forever.
3. The rivers have raised, O Lord, the rivers have raised their voice; the rivers raise their raging waves.
4. More than the sound of many waters, than the mighty breakers of the sea, is the Lord mighty on High.
5. Your testimonies are most trustworthy; Your House will be resplendent in holiness, O Lord, forever.
Chapter 94
An awe-inspiring and wondrous prayer with which every individual can pray for the redemption. It is also an important moral teaching.
1. The Lord is a God of retribution; O God of retribution, reveal Yourself!
2. Judge of the earth, arise; render to the arrogant their recompense.
3. How long shall the wicked, O Lord, how long shall the wicked exult?
4. They continuously speak insolently; all the evildoers act arrogantly.
5. They crush Your people, O Lord, and oppress Your heritage.
6. They kill the widow and the stranger, and murder the orphans.
7. And they say, "The Lord does not see, the God of Jacob does not perceive.”
8. Understand, you senseless among the people; you fools, when will you become wise?
9. Shall He who implants the ear not hear? Shall He who forms the eye not see?
10. Shall He who chastises nations not punish? Shall He who imparts knowledge to man [not know]?
11. The Lord knows the thoughts of man, that they are naught.
12. Fortunate is the man whom You chastise, O Lord, and instruct him in Your Torah,
13. bestowing upon him tranquillity in times of adversity, until the pit is dug for the wicked.
14. For the Lord will not abandon His people, nor forsake His heritage.
15. For judgment shall again be consonant with justice, and all the upright in heart will pursue it.
16. Who would rise up for me against the wicked ones; who would stand up for me against the evildoers?
17. Had the Lord not been a help to me, my soul would have soon dwelt in the silence [of the grave].
18. When I thought that my foot was slipping, Your kindness, O Lord, supported me.
19. When my [worrisome] thoughts multiply within me, Your consolation delights my soul.
20. Can one in the seat of evil, one who makes iniquity into law, consort with You?
21. They band together against the life of the righteous, and condemn innocent blood.
22. The Lord has been my stronghold; my God, the strength of my refuge.
23. He will turn their violence against them and destroy them through their own wickedness; the Lord, our God, will destroy them.
Chapter 95
This psalm speaks of the future, when man will say to his fellow, "Come, let us sing and offer praise to God for the miracles He has performed for us!"
1. Come, let us sing to the Lord; let us raise our voices in jubilation to the Rock of our deliverance.
2. Let us approach Him with thanksgiving; let us raise our voices to Him in song.
3. For the Lord is a great God, and a great King over all supernal beings;
4. in His hands are the depths of the earth, and the heights of the mountains are His.
5. Indeed, the sea is His, for He made it; His hands formed the dry land.
6. Come, let us prostrate ourselves and bow down; let us bend the knee before the Lord, our Maker.
7. For He is our God, and we are the people that He tends, the flock under His [guiding] hand-even this very day, if you would but hearken to His voice!
8. Do not harden your heart as at Merivah, as on the day at Massah in the wilderness,
9. where your fathers tested Me; they tried Me, though they had seen My deeds.
10. For forty years I quarreled with that generation; and I said, "They are a people of erring hearts, they do not know My ways.”
11. So I vowed in My anger that they would not enter My resting place.
Chapter 96
The time will yet come when man will say to his fellow: "Come, let us sing to God!"
1. Sing to the Lord a new song; sing to the Lord, all the earth.
2. Sing to the Lord, bless His Name; proclaim His deliverance from day to day.
3. Recount His glory among the nations, His wonders among all the peoples.
4. For the Lord is great and highly praised; He is awesome above all gods.
5. For all the gods of the nations are naught, but the Lord made the heavens.
6. Majesty and splendor are before Him, might and beauty in His Sanctuary.
7. Render to the Lord, O families of nations, render to the Lord honor and might.
8. Render to the Lord honor due to His Name; bring an offering and come to His courtyards.
9. Bow down to the Lord in resplendent holiness; tremble before Him, all the earth.
10. Proclaim among the nations, "The Lord reigns"; indeed, the world is firmly established that it shall not falter; He will judge the peoples with righteousness.
11. The heavens will rejoice, the earth will exult; the sea and its fullness will roar.
12. The fields and everything therein will jubilate; then all the trees of the forest will sing.
13. Before the Lord [they shall rejoice], for He has come, for He has come to judge the earth; He will judge the world with justice, and the nations with His truth.
Tanya: Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 6• Lessons in Tanya
• Tuesday, Menachem Av 19, 5775 · August 4, 2015
Today's Tanya Lesson
Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 6
וזורע צדקה שכר אמת במשלי י״א
“He who sows tzedakah has a ‘reward’ of truth” (Proverbs 11).1
פירוש: ששכר זריעת הצדקה היא מדת אמת
This means that the attribute of truth is the (G‑d-given) reward for sowing tzedakah.
The term “this means” is generally used to forestall an alternative interpretation. Here, too, by this term the Alter Rebbe stresses that we are to understand the Hebrew word secher to mean “reward” rather than its being understood to mean “closing off and restraining” (water or whatever, in order to concentrate it). The latter interpretation is that of Rashi; a parallel term is the word ויסכרו in the verse,2 “And the wellsprings of the deep were sealed.”
Furthermore, even the Targum and other commentaries who do read secher to mean “payment of a reward,” can be understood to mean that the individual who sows charity receives a true reward, i.e., an everlasting reward, rather than a reward that consists of truth.
The Alter Rebbe therefore specifies: “This means” that the reward granted from above for sowing tzedakah is — the attribute of truth.
וכתיב: תתן אמת ליעקב
It is also written,3 “You give truth unto Jacob,” which would appear to indicate once again that the attribute of truth is granted from Above.
According to the commentaries of Rashi and Targum, however, this verse does not describe a state of affairs. Rather, it petitions that G‑d give truth (“Give truth unto Jacob”), that He fulfill for Jacob’s children the truthful promises that He had made to Jacob. Hence this verse does not prove that the attribute of truth is a gift granted from Above.
The Alter Rebbe therefore goes on to specify that this verse is to be understood in the same light as the verse quoted at the outset of this epistle, as follows:
ושבחא דקודשא בריך הוא מסדר נביא כו׳, כמו שכתוב בזוהר הקדוש
And [here] the prophet [Micah] speaks the praises of the Holy One, blessed be He, as is written in the holy Zohar.4 I.e., rather than petitioning G‑d, this verse extols Him for fulfilling his promise of granting the attribute of truth to Jacob.
פירוש: שהקדוש ברוך הוא, הוא הנותן מדת אמת ליעקב
This means that it is the Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives the attribute of truth unto Jacob.
וצריך להבין: וכי אין אמת ליעקב, חס ושלום, עד שהקדוש ברוך הוא יתן לו מלמעלה
Now this needs to be understood: Does Jacob have no truth, heaven forfend, until the Holy One, blessed be He, gives it to him from above?
אך הנה מודעת זאת דמדת יעקב היא מדת רחמנות
However, it is well known5 that the attribute of Jacob is the attribute of compassion.
Abraham epitomizes Chesed, the attribute of kindness; Isaac epitomizes Gevurah, the attribute of severity; the predominant attribute of Jacob is Tiferet, or Rachamim, compassion. The inward aspect of the soul’s divine service when motivated by Chesed is — the love of G‑d; the inward aspect of the soul’s divine service when motivated by Gevurah is — the awe of G‑d; so, too, divine service when motivated by compassion has its distinctive inward aspect:
ועבודת ה׳ במדת רחמנות
And the service of G‑d through compassion
היא הבאה מהתעוררות רחמים רבים בלב האדם על ניצוץ אלקות שבנפשו
derives from the arousal, in a man’s heart, of profound compassion for the Divine spark in his soul,
הרחוקה מאור פני ה׳, כאשר הולך בחשך הבלי עולם
which is distant from the light of G‑d’s Countenance whenever [the man] goes about in the darkness of the vanities of the world.
When a man finds himself straying forlorn in a state of spiritual darkness, he can thus awaken within himself a feeling of compassion for the soul-spark within him that he himself has banished from the light of its Divine Source.
והתעוררות רחמנות זו היא באה מהתבונה והדעת בגדולת ה׳
This arousal of compassion itself derives from (and is proportionate to) [a man’s] understanding and deep cognition of the greatness of G‑d:
איך שאפילו העולמות העליונים, למעלה מעלה עד אין קץ, כלא ממש חשיבי קמיה
[he reflects upon] how even the most infinitely sublime worlds are considered as truly naught before Him.
כי כל שפעם וחיותם אינו רק מזיו והארה מאות אחד משמו יתברך
For all their [G‑d-given] bounty and vitality derives from a mere gleam or reflection of a single letter of His blessed Name,
כמאמר: ביו״ד נברא עולם הבא כו׳
as it is written,6 “The World to Come was created [merely] by the letter yud [of the Divine Name].”
The spiritual worlds, all of which are included in the term “World to Come,” were thus all created by means of the single letter yud of the Divine Name.
והנה בזיו והארה זו, שהוא התפשטות החיות משמו יתברך להחיות עליונים ותחתונים
Now it is in this radiation and reflection, which is an extension of the life-giving energy [that flows] from [G‑d’s] blessed Name to animate the higher and lower beings,
הוא שיש הבדל והפרש בין עליונים לתחתונים
that there is a distinction and difference with respect to higher and lower beings,
שעולם הזה נברא בה׳ וכו׳
so that “this world was created through the letter hei,” and so on, while the higher worlds were created through the letter yud.
As explained in the previous epistle, this lowly corporeal world receives its vitality only from the “matter” or “body” of the letters of Supernal speech, which in turn derives from the letter hei of the Divine Name. The higher worlds, however, receive their vitality from the “form” or “soul” of these letters, and this derives from the level of Chochmah, represented by theyud of the Divine Name. However, these different modes in which the life-giving influence of the Divine Name is diffused to the upper and lower worlds respectively, relate only to the radiation and reflection of the Divine Name; they do not relate to G‑d’s Essence.
(Moreover, any name is a mere reflection of the essence of the entity named. A person’s name, for example, is not his essence: it merely reflects it; it is merely a means of relating to another person. In the same way, the Divine Name is merely a reflection of the essence of the Divine.)
Until now the Alter Rebbe has spoken in general terms of the differences between the higher and lower worlds.
וכן כל שינויי הפרטים שבכל עולם ועולם
Also, all the variety of details within each world
הוא לפי שינויי צירופי האותיות
is determined by differences in the combinations of the letters through which they were created.
וכן שינויי הזמנים בעבר, הוה ועתיד
So, too, the distinctions between the temporal dimensions of past, present and future,
ושינויי כל הקורות בחילופי הזמנים
and all the variety of events throughout the changing times, —
הכל משינויי צירופי האותיות
all of these, too, are determined by differences in the combinations of the letters.
שהן הן המשכת החיות ממדותיו, יתברך שמו
For [these combinations of letters] are the conduits of the life-giving force that proceeds from attributes of [G‑d] (Blessed be His Name),
(כמו שכתוב בלקוטי אמרים חלק ב׳, פרק י״א)
(7as explained in Likkutei Amarim, Part II, ch. 11).
All the above-mentioned differences are to be found only in the flow of vitality which emanates from G‑d’s attributes and which then descends through the letters of His creative speech.
אבל לגבי מהותו ועצמותו יתברך, כתיב: אני ה׳ לא שניתי
But as for His blessed Being and Essence, it is written:8 “I, G‑d, have not changed” as a result of creation —
בין בבחינת שינויי ההשתלשלות, מרום המעלות עד למטה מטה
neither (a) in terms of changes in the progression from the uppermost of levels to the nethermost,
שכמו שהוא יתברך מצוי בעליונים, כך הוא ממש בשוה בתחתונים
for just as He is present in the higher worlds, so [is He present] in precisely the same measure in the nether worlds, since from His perspective there is absolutely no difference between them: all are equally distant from Him, “for no thought can apprehend Him at all, even in the higher worlds,”
(וכמו שכתוב בלקוטי אמרים חלק א׳, פרק נ״א)
(9as is explained in Likkutei Amarim, Part I, ch. 51),
The higher and lower worlds differ only in relation to the stream of life-giving energy that flows forth from Him: this vitality is more revealed in the higher worlds than in the lower.
ובין בבחינת שינויי הזמן
nor (b) in terms of temporal changes [is there any difference from G‑d’s perspective];
שכמו שהיה הוא לבדו הוא, יחיד ומיוחד, לפני ששת ימי בראשית, כך הוא עתה אחר הבריאה
for just as He was alone, one and unique, before the Six Days of Creation, so He is now after Creation.
But how can G‑d’s absolute unity remain unaltered, despite the advent of a whole created universe?
והיינו: משום שהכל כאין ואפס ממש, לגבי מהותו ועצמותו
This is so because everything is absolutely as nothing and naught in relation to His being and essence,
וכמו אות אחד מדבורו של אדם, או אפילו ממחשבתו, לגבי כללות מהות הנפש השכלית ועצמותה
just as a single letter of a man’s speech, or even of his thought, [is of absolutely no consequence] in relation to the entire being and essence of the rational soul,
I.e., this is true not only of a letter of speech but also of thought, even though the soul-garment of thought is more abstract and subtle than speech and is thus closer to the soul.
It is the intellect of the rational soul that causes the emergence of the emotions; this, in turn, leads to thought and speech. Thus, in comparison to the essence of the soul itself, which transcends even intellect by far, one letter of speech or even of thought is of absolutely no consequence.
However, the above analogy is merely offered:
על דרך משל, לשכך את האזן
metaphorically speaking, to appease the ear, in order to give finite mortals some inkling of the insignificance of creation in the eyes of the Creator,
ובאמת אין ערוך אליך, כתיב
while in fact, as it is written,10 “There is no comparison unto You.”
Unlike the single letter of thought or speech that bears some degree of comparison to the soul, albeit an infinitesimal one, creation stands in no proportion whatever to the Creator.
וכמו שכתוב במקום אחר (בלקוטי אמרים חלק ב׳, פרק ט׳, עיין שם)
This is explained elsewhere (11in Likkutei Amarim, Part II, ch. 9); see there.
וזהו שאומרים: המלך המרומם לבדו מאז
This underlies what we say in the Sabbath prayers:12 “The King Who is exalted, alone from aforetime.”
פירוש: כמו מאז, קודם הבריאה, היה הוא לבדו הוא
This means that just as aforetime, before the creation, He was alone, and apart from Him nothing existed,
כך עתה הוא מרומם כו׳ ומתנשא מימות עולם
so now, too, He is exalted and elevated beyond “the days of the world.”
פירוש: שהוא רם ונשא למעלה מעלה מבחינת זמן, הנקרא בשם ימות עולם
This means that He is exalted and elevated, transcending the dimension of time, which is known as “the days of the world.”
והיינו: לפי שחיות כל ימות עולם הוא רק מבחינת המלך
This is so because the life-force of all “the days of the world,” the life-force of the dimension of time, derives solely from the spiritual level known as “the King,” i.e., from the Sefirah of Malchut,
The axis of past, present and future — the element of time — relates only to the Sefirah of Malchut; concerning this level we may differentiate between the phrases, “He reigned,” “He reigns,” and “He shall reign.” However, the Sefirot and attributes that are above Malchut transcend the element of time,
וכמו שמבואר במקום אחר
as is explained elsewhere.13
Since G‑d utterly transcends creation, which is absolutely of no consequence in relation to His Essence:
ואי לזאת, הרחמנות גדולה מאד מאד על הניצוץ השוכן בגוף החשוך והאפל, משכא דחויא
It follows that there is extremely great cause to feel compassion for the spark, which is14 “a part of G‑d Above,” that dwells in the dark and gloomy body — the15 “hide of the snake.”
העלול לקבל טומאה ולהתגאל בכל התאוות, רחמנא ליצלן
For [the body] is liable to contract impurity by indulging in prohibited things that derive from the three utterly impure kelipot, and to become defiled by various lusts (May the Merciful One spare us) involving things which, though permitted, derive from kelipat nogah,
לולי שהקדוש ברוך הוא מגן לו
if not for G‑d’s serving the man as a shield,
ונותן לו עוז ותעצומות ללחום עם הגוף ותאותיו ולנצחן
and giving him strength and might to wage war with the body and its passions and to triumph over them.
Even when the body does not actually lust after physical pleasures, the very fact that it is so inclined points to its lowly state — and it is within such a body that the Divine spark is obliged to spend its days.
וזהו שאומרים: אדון עוזנו כו׳ מגן ישענו כו׳
And this is the meaning of [the continuation of the prayer],16 “Master of our strength, Shield of our salvation.”
After extolling G‑d as “the King who is exalted, alone from aforetime,” and beseeching Him in His “abundant mercies to have compassion on us,” we continue with the above-quoted phrases. With these words we affirm that G‑d provides us with an encompassing light and power, far transcending man’s own puny powers, that enables us to triumph over the body and its passions.
* * *
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Verse 18, where the letters sin and chaf of שכר are each vocalized with a segol. |
| 2. | Bereishit 8:2. |
| 3. | Michah 7:20. |
| 4. | III, 131b. |
| 5. | “Cf. [Tanya], Part I, ch. 45.” ( — Note of the Rebbe.) |
| 6. | Menachot 29b; Yerushalmi, Chagigah 2:1. See also above, Epistle 5. |
| 7. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 8. | Malachi 3:6. |
| 9. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 10. | Tehillim 40:6. |
| 11. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 12. | Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p. 170. |
| 13. | “Cf. Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 7. However, we cannot assume that the Alter Rebbe is referring directly to this chapter, for then he would have stated so explicitly, as above (‘in Likkutei Amarim, Part II’). At any rate, this does not warrant a lengthy discussion at this point.” ( — Note of the Rebbe.) |
| 14. | Tanya, beginning of ch. 2. |
| 15. | See Introduction to Tikkunei Zohar, p. 10b; also elsewhere. |
| 16. | Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p. 171. |
• Sefer Hamitzvos:Tuesday, Menachem Av 19, 5775 · August 4, 2015
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 99
Ritual Impurity of a Menstruating Woman
We are commanded regarding the ritual impurity associated with menstruation. [I.e., when contracted, one must follow all the laws associated with this impurity.]
Ritual Impurity of a Menstruating Woman
Positive Commandment 99
Translated by Berel Bell
The 99th mitzvah is that we are commanded regarding the tumah of niddah. This mitzvah includes tumas niddah and all of its laws.1
FOOTNOTES
1.See Hilchos M'tamei Mishkav U'Moshav
Gerushin - Chapter Two
Halacha 1
The Torah's statement [Deuteronomy 24:1], "And he will write a bill of divorce for her and place it in her hand," refers both to [a husband] who writes [the get] with his own hand and to one who tells [another person] to write it for him. Similarly, [the husband] may place it in her hand or tell an agent to give it to her.1
The verse states, "And he will write," only to teach that divorce is effective only through the medium of a written document. "And [he will] place it" teaches that the woman may not take [the get] herself.
Halacha 2
When [a husband] tells two [colleagues]: "Write a get, sign it, and give it to my wife," the two may write it, sign it,2 and give it to her. They are [the husband's] agents [for the divorce], and they are the witnesses [to it].3
Similarly, if [the husband] tells a scribe: "Write a get for my wife for me," and he tells the witnesses to sign, the get may be written, signed and given to [the husband]. He may use it to divorce his wife whenever he desires.4
Halacha 3
We may write a get for a man even when he is not accompanied by his wife, provided the witnesses and the scribe who wrote and signed [the get] know the identity of the man and his wife.5
If there are two men in a city whose names are the same and whose wives' names are the same, one may divorce his wife only in the presence of the other. [This safeguard was enacted] lest one [of the men] have a get written and give it to the wife of the other man, causing her to [be considered] to be divorced from [her husband].6
Halacha 4
Halacha 5
The husband himself must tell the scribe to write [the get] and the witnesses to sign [it]. When a court of law9 or two [colleagues] ask a man: "Shall we write aget for your wife?" and he tells them to write [it and sign it],10 it is acceptable if they themselves write [the get] and sign it.
If, however, they tell a scribe [to write] and he does, and they tell witnesses [to sign] and they do, the get is void, because it was written by someone who was not told to write it by the husband himself.11 [This ruling applies] even when they give [the get] to the husband, who in turn gives it to his wife in the presence of witnesses.12
Halacha 6
When [a man] tells two or three [colleagues]: "Tell a scribe to write a get for my wife and tell the witnesses to sign," and they convey these instructions, the getis unacceptable.13[The same ruling applies if the husband] tells two [colleagues] to tell a scribe to write a get and tells them to sign it.14
This matter should be deliberated upon at length, because the get is close to being considered void.15
Halacha 7
What is the difference between the terms "unacceptable" (pasul) and "void" (bateil)? Whenever this text refers to a get as "void," that means that according to Scriptural law it is void. Whenever the term "unacceptable" is used, it refers to a get deemed unacceptable by Rabbinic decree.16
Halacha 8
When a husband brings a get that has been signed in his hand and tells [two colleagues]: "Give this get to my wife," they should give it to her [and it is acceptable].17
If he tells others to write a get, sign it and give to his wife, and they write it, sign it and give it to her, and then it is discovered that the get is void or unacceptable, they may write another get - or even 100 other gittin - until the woman receives an acceptable get.18
Halacha 9
If the husband tells [two colleagues]: Write and sign [a get] and give it to an agent to bring to her, and they do as they were charged, but it was discovered that the get was void or unacceptable, they may not write another [get] until they consult the husband.
[The rationale is] that [the husband] did not charge them with [effecting the divorce]. Perhaps he wanted merely that they write [the get] and give it to the agent. [If so, their agency was completed,] and nothing remains for them to do, for they have written it and given it [to the agent]. Therefore, they should not write another [get].19
If they do write another get that is acceptable and give it to the agent - who in turn gives it to the wife - the status of the divorce is in doubt.20
Halacha 10
When a person tells two or more [colleagues]: "Write a get and give to my wife," "Divorce her," "Send her away," "Release her,"21 "Discharge her," or "Write a letter and give it to her," [the colleagues] should write an acceptable get and give it to her.
Halacha 11
If he tells them: "Get her out," "Let her go," "Permit her [to remarry]," "Let her be," "Assist her," there is doubt whether or not these terms imply that she should be divorced or whether they have another meaning. Therefore, [these individuals] should not write [a get] for her. If they write a get and give it to her, the status of the divorce is in doubt.
Halacha 12
When [a man] says: "Write a get for my wife," [the people he addresses] should write the get, sign it and give it to him. They should not give it to the woman unless he tells them to. If they do give it to the woman, the get is not [effective].24
When does the above apply? With regard to a healthy man. If, however, a man is dangerously ill - i.e., he suddenly falls sick and his illness rapidly becomes very severe - or if he is being led away in chains,25 even for financial matters, or he departs on an ocean journey, or he departs with a caravan [on a desert journey] and he says, "Write a get for my wife," they should write it, sign it and give it to her. For it is clear that his intent was that they should write the get and give it to her.26
Halacha 13
[The following rules apply when] a healthy person says: "Compose a get for my wife," and [his listeners] write a get, sign it and give it to her. If he commits suicide immediately thereafter - e.g., he throws himself down from a roof or jumps into the sea - the get is acceptable.27
If, however, he climbs up onto a [high] roof, and he is buffeted by the wind until he falls and dies, the get is void.28 If there is doubt whether he threw himself down [from the roof] or was buffeted by the wind, the get is valid unless it becomes known with certainty that he was buffeted by the wind.29
Similarly, if a man was cast into a pit and he said, "Whoever hears my voice should write a get for my wife," [his listeners] should write a get and give it to her, provided they recognize his identity.30 Even if [afterwards,] they took him out of the pit and could not identify him,31 [the divorce] is acceptable. For in time of danger, [a get] can be written and given to [a man's wife] even if they do not know his identity.
Similarly, when a person suffers many severe blows, to the extent that it is impossible to for him to survive - or even if the majority of [his windpipe and gullet]32 have been cut - and he makes motions33 and says: "Write a get for my wife," [his listeners] should write [a get] and give it [to her]. Although he will eventually die, he is alive at this time.34
Halacha 14
[The following rules apply when] a person is troubled by an evil spirit, and at the time when his infirmity begins to take hold of him says: "Write a get for my wife." His statements are of no consequence, because his thoughts are not organized and settled.35 The same ruling applies to a person who has become as drunk as Lot.36 If a drunkard has not reached that level [of incapacity], [the status of the divorce] is in doubt.37
Halacha 15
[The following rules apply when a] healthy [man] says: "Write a get for my wife and give it to her," and afterwards he becomes mentally disturbed. We wait until he becomes healthy again, and then we write the get and give it to her. There is no need to consult with him about the matter again when he regains his heath.38
If a get is written and given before he regains his health, it is unacceptable.39
Halacha 16
[The following rules apply when] a person loses his ability to speak, but is of sound mind. We ask him: "Should we write a get for your wife?" If he nods his head affirmatively, we test him with three [questions with different answers].40 If he answers those [questions] to be answered affirmatively in the affirmative and those to be answered negatively in the negative, they should write [a get] and give it [to her]. His mental state must be checked thoroughly, lest he not be of sound mind.
Similarly, if he writes by hand: "Write a get and give it to my wife," they should write it and give it to her, if [it appears] that he is of sound mind. For the laws governing a person who loses his ability to speak differ from those governing a deaf-mute.41
Halacha 17
When a person married while sound of mind and became a deaf-mute, he cannot divorce his wife until he regains his mental health.42 Needless to say, this applies to a person who loses his mental stability.43 We do not rely on the motions of a deaf-mute or on his writing, even if he is of sound mind.
If, however, a deaf-mute married a woman while he was in that state, he may divorce her by making motions, for his consecration of her is not valid according to Scriptural law, as has been explained.44 Just as he married her by making motions, he may divorce her by making motions.
Halacha 18
When a man consecrates a minor via her father's agency and [seeks to] divorce her while she is a minor, her father should accept her get.45 When the getreaches her father's possession, she is divorced.
If [the husband seeks to] divorce [his arusah] when she is a na'arah,46 the divorce is effective when the get reaches her possession or her father's possession. A na'arah who is consecrated may not appoint an agent to receive her get from her husband during her father's lifetime.47 A father, by contrast, may appoint an agent to receive a get for his daughter who has been consecrated, whether she is a minor or a na'arah.
Halacha 19
[The following rules apply when] a girl's father consecrates her48 when she is a minor and then [the father] dies. If [the girl] can differentiate between a get and another object,49 the divorce is effective after the get reaches her possession. If [she is] incapable [of making such a distinction], she cannot be divorced until she becomes capable of making such distinctions.50If such a divorce is carried out, it is of no consequence.
Halacha 20
When a man whom the law requires to be compelled to divorce his wife51 does not desire to divorce her, the court should have him beaten until he consents, at which time they should have a get written. The get is acceptable. This applies at all times and in all places.52
Similarly, if gentiles beat him while telling him: "Do what the Jews are telling you to do," and the Jews have the gentiles apply pressure on him until [he consents] to divorce his wife, the divorce is acceptable. If, however, the gentiles compel him to write [a get] on their own initiative, the get is [merely] unacceptable.53The rationale is that the law requires him to give a divorce.
Why is this get not void? For he is being compelled - either by Jews or by gentiles - [to divorce] against his will [and a get must be given voluntarily].
Because the concept of being compelled against one's will applies only when speaking about a person who is being compelled and forced to do something that the Torah does not obligate him to do - e.g., a person who was beaten until he consented to a sale,54 or to give a present. If, however, a person's evil inclination presses him to negate [the observance of] a mitzvah or to commit a transgression, and he was beaten until he performed the action he was obligated to perform, or he dissociated himself from the forbidden action, he is not considered to have been forced against his will. On the contrary, it is he himself who is forcing [his own conduct to become debased].55
With regard to this person who [outwardly] refuses to divorce [his wife] - he wants to be part of the Jewish people, and he wants to perform all the mitzvot and eschew all the transgressions; it is only his evil inclination that presses him. Therefore, when he is beaten until his [evil] inclination has been weakened, and he consents [to the divorce], he is considered to have performed the divorce willfully.
[Different laws apply when] the law does not require him to divorce his wife, and a Jewish court or simple people compel him to divorce her. This get is deemed unacceptable. Since, however, it was Jews who compelled him, he [is advised] to complete the divorce [in a proper manner]. If, by contrast, gentiles compel him to divorce when it was not required, the divorce is void. Even though he tells the gentiles that he consented and tells the Jews to write and sign [a get], since the law does not require him to divorce, and he was compelled to do so by gentiles, the get is void.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. |
In most matters of Torah law, a person is able to charge an agent to act on his behalf. From the Rambam's wording, Terumat HaDeshen (Responsum 228) and the Kovetz deduce that the Rambam requires that not only the person who gives the get, but also the scribe, must be appointed as agents. This decision is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 120:1). Moreover, the Shulchan Aruch continues, stating that in addition, the scribe must write the get with paper and ink belonging to the husband.
There are, however, other opinions, which maintain that the scribe need not be appointed as an agent. (See Chapter 3, Halachah 16 and notes.)
|
| 2. |
There is a difficulty in this instance, for the scribe must also act as one of the witnesses who sign the get. Tosafot and many other authorities rule that a get signed by a scribe is unacceptable. In the Beit Yosef (Even HaEzer 130), Rav Yosef Karo explains that the Rambam agrees that a priori, the scribe should not act as one of the witnesses who sign the get. When there is no alternative, however, it is acceptable. (See Lechem Mishneh.)
|
| 3. |
In this instance, the act the agent effects does not concern him. Therefore, there is no difficulty in his serving as a witness to it. (See also Hilchot Ishut 3:16.)
|
| 4. |
There are two points of clarification that must be made with regard to this ruling: First, if the husband enters into privacy with his wife after having the get written, the get is nullified, for we assume that the couple engaged in sexual relations, as reflected in Chapter 3, Halachah 5.
Second, there is the problem that the get is predated - i.e., although it was dated on the day it was written, it is the giving of the get and not the writing of the get that effects the divorce. Thus, the date on which the get was given and the date of the divorce are not the same.
With regard to that issue, we are forced to say that the Rambam does not consider it to be problematic. Indeed, when discussing the issue of predated gittin (Chapter 1, Halachah 25), the Rambam makes no mention of this matter at all. Other authorities differ, and it is their view that is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 127:5), which states that if a get is not given on the day on which it was written, it is acceptable only when given by an agent. (See Beit Shmuel127:7.)
|
| 5. |
See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 24:3-4. The Kessef Mishneh emphasizes that there are several points to be derived from an analysis of the Rambam's choice of wording in the present halachah and in that source:
a) Even if the man is accompanied by a woman he claims to be his wife, the witnesses may not sign a get for her until this fact is established.
b) It is not significant whether or not the scribe knows the identity of the man and his wife. When the scribe does not sign the get (see the notes to the previous halachah), it is the witnesses alone who must be aware of the identity of the husband and wife.
c) As long as a person's name has been established in a city for thirty days - even if it is only according to his own statements - this is sufficient.
d) The witnesses must also know the names of the father of the husband and of the wife.
e) The person's father's name can also be established on the basis of his own statements.
|
| 6. |
From the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Bava Batra 10:3), it appears that the intent is to prevent the woman receiving the get from engineering such an act of deception.
Our translation is based on authoritative manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah. The standard printed text states "causing her to be forbidden to him," i.e., she will think that she has been divorced, and on that basis, she will marry another man, and thus become forbidden to her first husband.
|
| 7. |
A time of danger means an instance when the husband is in danger of dying and asks to have aget written for his wife, so that she will not have to undergo the rites of either yibbum or chalitzah(Gittin 66a).
|
| 8. |
Although according to Scriptural law it is the husband who should pay for the writing of the get (for it is his responsibility), Bava Batra 168a explains that our Sages transferred this obligation to the woman, lest the husband lack the financial resources and cause the woman to wait unnecessarily for her get.
|
| 9. |
The Rambam mentions a court of law to indicate that in this instance, their authority is no greater than that of an ordinary person.
|
| 10. |
The bracketed addition is made on the basis of the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh.
|
| 11. |
The husband charged these individuals with the composition and the signing of the get. They do not have the authority to convey this responsibility to someone else.
In other instances, an agent can transfer his agency to another person, but here the scribe and the witness were charged with only a verbal command, and a verbal command cannot be transferred to another agent (Gittin 66b).
|
| 12. |
For the difficulty is with the composition of the get itself.
|
| 13. |
In contrast to the previous halachah, in which the get is deemed void, here the Rambam rules that it is unacceptable. This more lenient ruling is given because in this instance, the husband's colleagues carried out his instructions.
The Ra'avad and many other authorities also consider this get to be void, for they maintain that the scribe must hear his appointment from the husband directly. The Rambam, however, maintains that the divorce is acceptable according to Scriptural law. As a safeguard, the Rabbis did not accept it, lest a woman hire agents who will tell the scribe and witnesses to compose a getin the husband's name, even though he did not convey such instructions (Gittin 67a).
|
| 14. |
For the husband did not convey the instructions to the scribe himself.
|
| 15. |
Rav David HaCohen interprets this to mean that this case is judged more severely than othergittin that are unacceptable, and the status of the woman's divorce is in doubt. This is also the ruling of the Ramah. Rav Moshe Alshacar, however, differs and maintains that there is no difference between this instance and others in which the get is deemed unacceptable.
|
| 16. |
The practical difference between these two terms is explained in Chapter 10, Halachot 1 and 2. When a get is void, the woman's first marriage is not annulled, and she must leave her second husband if she has remarried. Any children she bears the second husband are considered to bemamzerim. When the get is deemed unacceptable by our Rabbis, by contrast, the woman should not remarry, but if she does remarry she is allowed to remain married to her second husband.
|
| 17. |
We do not suspect that the husband had a void or unacceptable get composed and gave it to his wife to cause her difficulties (Kessef Mishneh).
|
| 18. |
We do not say that the agency with which they were entrusted involved only the composition of one get, and that they must receive a new charge from the husband before writing another one.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 122:1) states that if the get is not unacceptable, but does not conform with the standard demanded by the local Rav, the scribe does not have the right to write a second get, for the agency with which he was charged by the husband has already been discharged. Therefore, it is customary for a husband to tell the scribe and the witnesses to write as many gittin as necessary, until one finds favor in the eyes of the Rav arranging the divorce.
|
| 19. |
If the husband had in fact given them only such a limited agency, were they to have another getwritten, they would no longer be acting in the agency of the husband, but rather on their own initiative.
Rav Moshe HaCohen differs with the Rambam on this point, maintaining that since they did not write an acceptable get, their agency was not completed. For the husband did not charge them with writing a worthless piece of paper; he wanted them to write a get. Note the Beit Shmuel 122:7, who interprets the disqualifying factor mentioned by the Rambam as referring to a disqualification that occurred after the get was given to the agent. He maintains that if a get that was void or unacceptable was given to the agent, even the Rambam would allow the writing of another get.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 122:2) quotes the ruling of the Rambam, while the Ramah follows the opinion of Rav Moshe HaCohen.
|
| 20. |
We are not certain that their agency was limited in scope. Perhaps the husband's intent was that they effect the divorce.
|
| 21. |
This and the following term are acceptable, because they are Aramaic equivalents of the word "divorce."
|
| 22. |
These expressions do not convey adequately enough the intent that the husband desires to divorce his wife for them to be considered effective in bringing about the appointment of the agents for this purpose.
|
| 23. |
Note the Beit Shmuel 141:21, who quotes authorities who maintain that even in such instances the status of the divorce should be considered doubtful.
|
| 24. |
For the husband has not charged them with effecting the divorce.
|
| 25. |
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Gittin 6:5), the Rambam interprets this as referring to a person taken from jail in chains to be judged by a gentile magistrate.
|
| 26. |
We assume that, in all these instances, his intent was to divorce his wife, lest he die and she be required to undergo the rite of either yibbum or chalitzah. Alternatively, he knew that he was entering a dangerous situation, and feared that he might die, without there being any witnesses of his death. In order to prevent his wife from being forced to remain unmarried for the rest of her life, he charges witnesses with the composition of a get.
He surely wanted to tell the witnesses to give the get, and it was only because of his concern with his personal situation that he forgot to do so (op. cit.). (See Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 8:24, which relates similar concepts with regard to a person's division of his estate.)
|
| 27. |
In this instance as well, we assume that the person intended to say that the get should be given, but failed to mention the point because of his preoccupation with his own concerns.
|
| 28. |
For his intent is not clear, and it is possible that he wanted to deliberate before having the getgiven.
|
| 29. |
The Rambam's ruling is debated by the commentaries, for it is questionable why the get would be considered valid, in light of the doubt that exists. Indeed, there are commentaries that suggest that the text before us is a printing error and that the Rambam considers the status of the divorce to be in doubt. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 141:18) rules that if the husband falls immediately afterwards, the get is acceptable. If not, the status of the divorce is in doubt.
|
| 30. |
The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:19) states that the man must state his name, the name of his wife, the name of the city in which he lives and the name of the city in which she lives.
|
| 31. |
E.g., his face had been cut to the point where his identity was no longer recognizable.
|
| 32. |
The slitting of these organs are the two signs that determine whether or not ritual slaughter is acceptable.
|
| 33. |
The Beit Shmuel 121:11 interprets this to mean that the man shakes his head in response to questions (see Halachah 16) and thus indicates that he desires to divorce his wife.
|
| 34. |
The get is not considered to have been given after the man died, and his wife is not required to undergo the rites of yibbum or chalitzah. See Chapter 6, Halachah 28.
|
| 35. |
For a person's actions to have halachic significance, he must be mentally competent at the time he performs them.
|
| 36. |
Whom Genesis, Chapter 19, describes as having become so drunk that he was not aware of having sex with his daughters.
|
| 37. |
The Rambam appears to be saying that if we are certain that the person is drunk, but see that he is conscious enough to have some control over his behavior, a get that he orders to be given is of doubtful status.
The commentaries question this understanding, noting that in Hilchot Ishut 4:18, the Rambam rules that kiddushin given by a drunk are viable, unless he reaches Lot's state. Similarly, with regard to the entire Torah, a drunk is considered responsible for his conduct. If he commits a transgression punishable by death while drunk, he is executed. Despite these questions, theShulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 121:1) quotes the Rambam's wording. On this basis, the Beit Shmuel states that both a husband and a wife should not drink alcoholic beverages on the day of their divorce.
|
| 38. |
While the husband (the principal) is incapacitated, his agent (the scribe) cannot act on his behalf. Therefore, the get should not be written until he regains his health. Nevertheless, once he regains his health, the agency that he originally gave is unaffected, and the get should be written and delivered.
|
| 39. |
In the Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Karo questions why the Rambam uses the term "unacceptable" (pasul). Seemingly, based on Gittin 70b, this ruling should apply only when we have a means of healing the afflicted person. Otherwise, the get should be void. Indeed, in theShulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 121:2), Rav Yosef Karo rules accordingly. Note, however, the Beit Shmuel 121:2, who justifies the Rambam's ruling.
[The difference between these two opinions revolves around the fundamental conception of an agent's authority. Is he acting independently of the principal (in which case the principal's state is not of concern to us) or is he considered to be an extension of the principal (in which case, if the principal is unable to perform an act, neither is his agent). See Lekach Tov, Section 1.]
Based on the above, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 121:4) writes that we should check that a person who is giving a get when terminally ill is sound of mind.
|
| 40. |
According to the Kessef Mishneh, the intent is three questions in which at least one of the answers differs from the other two. There are other authorities who require two sets of three questions. Also, based on Gittin 70b, the Ramah (Even HaEzer 121:5) suggests that the person should be asked questions about fruit - e.g., would he desire a summer fruit in winter? His ability to discern with regard to these matters will serve as an indicator of whether or not he is of sound mind.
|
| 41. |
A deaf-mute is not considered to be of sound mind and is not held responsible for his conduct.
|
| 42. |
For the marriage bond he established is binding according to Scriptural law, and he is not capable of initiating divorce proceedings that have that power.
|
| 43. |
See Hilchot Edut 9:9, where the Rambam defines the term shoteh as including not only maniacs whose behavior is totally beyond control, but also those who are confused and lack the stability to function normally.
|
| 44. |
Hilchot Ishut 4:9.
|
| 45. |
Just as the Torah gives him authority to consecrate her, he is responsible for taking part in the divorce, for Deuteronomy 24:2 establishes an association between the forging of the marriage bond and its dissolution (Ketubot 47a).
This applies, however, only before the marriage bond is consummated. After nisu'in, the consummation of the marriage, the father no longer has any authority over his daughter even though she is below the age of majority. (See Hilchot Ishut 3:12.)
We may conclude that, before nisu'in, the Rambam does not consider the girl as having the authority to receive her own get. This opinion is accepted by most authorities and is quoted by theShulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 141:4). The Shulchan Aruch, however, also mentions the opinion of Tosafot, who maintain that the girl possesses this authority.
|
| 46. |
I.e., a girl between the age of twelve and twelve and a half, who has manifested signs of physical maturity. She is already considered to be past majority with regard to certain dimensions of Torah law. Nevertheless, her father is still granted authority over her in certain contexts. (See Hilchot Ishut 2:1, 3:11.)
|
| 47. |
A married girl below the age of majority, by contrast, may not appoint an agent to receive her geteven if her father dies or her marriage has been consummated (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer141:3.)
|
| 48. |
If the girl's father consecrates her, the kiddushin are effective according to Scriptural law, and a divorce is required. If, by contrast, the girl's father died, and her mother, her brother or she herself established a marriage bond, it is not binding according to Scriptural law and a get is not required. Instead, this marriage can be dissolved through the rite of mi'un, as described in Hilchot Ishut 4:7.
|
| 49. |
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 141:6) states that this refers to a girl of six or seven, depending on her intellectual capacities.
|
| 50. |
If, however, a minor's father is alive, he can accept a get on her behalf regardless of her age or degree of understanding. Rashi (Gittin 64b) differs and maintains that if she is unable to make distinctions, she cannot be divorced even via her father. Although the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 141:6) quotes both opinions, it appears to favor that of the Rambam.
|
| 51. |
E.g., a man whose wife says she is repulsed by him (Hilchot Ishut 14:8), a man who was married to a woman for ten years without her bearing a child (Hilchot Ishut 15:7), a man who becomes afflicted by [constant] bad breath or an odor from his nose, one who becomes a collector of dog feces, a miner of copper or a tanner or one who becomes a leper (Hilchot Ishut 25:11-12) or a priest who marries a divorcee (Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 17:7).
|
| 52. |
The application of this law is not confined to Eretz Yisrael or to the era when the Sanhedrin (the High Court of Law) was in power.
|
| 53. |
Rav Mesharshia states that the Rabbis deemed the get unacceptable, lest women become accustomed to hiring gentiles for this purpose (Bava Batra 48a). In the Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Karo notes that Gittin 88b appears to reject Rav Mesharshia's view and states that a getthat was forced on a man by gentiles is void entirely. (This indeed is the ruling of Rashi, Rabbenu Nissim and Rabbenu Asher.) In his Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 134:5), Rav Yosef Karo's wording is not specific when dealing with this issue. The Beit Shmuel 134:10 states that such a getis void.
|
| 54. |
See Hilchot Mechirah 10:1, which states that such a sale is acceptable, after the fact. Nevertheless, if the seller notifies the witnesses that he was compelled to sell against his will, the sale is nullified.
|
| 55. |
The Rambam's statements have implications far beyond their immediate halachic context. The Rambam is saying that the fundamental desire of every Jew is to affirm his Jewishness and observe the Torah and its mitzvot. Even when a person's conscious mind does not necessarily consent to this inner motivation, it is at work, molding his character without his knowledge. And at times, either because of undesirable circumstances - being compelled against his will as above - or because of desirable ones - an expression of Divine favor - this inner drive will surface.
|
Kelim - Chapter 12
Halacha 1
When wood keilim, leather keilim, or bone keilim are broken, they are purified of their ritual impurity. If one then made a k'li from the broken pieces or one collected the broken pieces and made other keilim from them, these are considered like other pure keilim that had never contracted impurity previously and are susceptible to impurity from the time they were fashioned onward.
All metal keilim that are broken after they contracted impurity regain purity. If one melted them down and made other keilim from them, they return to their previous impurity. A metalk'li cannot become utterly pure unless it was immersed in a mikveh while intact or it remains broken.
Halacha 2
The return of metal keilim to ritual impurity is a Rabbinic decree. Why did the Sages decree that metal keilim should return to their former impurity? This is a decree, enacted as a safeguard lest a person'sk'li contract impurity and he melt it down and make it into a newk'li on that day. If it is considered as pure as is its status according to Scriptural Law, one might come to say: Breaking a k'lipurifies it and immersing it purifies it. Just as when it is broken, melted down and fashioned into a newk'li, it is pure on that day, so too, if it is immersed, even though it is intact, one may mistakenly think that it is pure on that day and he will say that it is not necessary to wait until nightfall for keilim to regain purity. Due to this concern, the Sages decreed that they are impure.
Halacha 3
Whether a k'li contracted impurity from a corpse or another type of impurity and was then melted down, it returns to its former impurity until the ashes of the red heifer are sprinkled upon it and/or it is immersed in a mikveh.
If a k'li contracted impurity from a corpse and the ashes of the red heifer were sprinkled upon it on the third day and afterwards, it was melted down, anotherk'li was made from it and then ashes were sprinkled on it on the seventh day and it was immersed, it is still considered impure. The sprinkling before it was melted down is not linked to the sprinkling after it was melted down. It cannot regain purity unless ashes were sprinkled on it on the third and seventh days and it was immersed while it was a k'li before it was melted down or ashes would be sprinkled on it on the third and seventh days and it was immersed once it was made into a new k'li after it was melted down.
Halacha 4
The following laws apply when impure iron was mixed with pure iron. If the majority was from the impure metal, it is considered as impure. If the majority was from the pure metal, it is pure. If there were equal amounts, it is impure. Similarly, when mud is mixed with turds and the mixture was fired in a kiln and made into a k'li, if the majority was from the mud, it is susceptible to impurity, because it is an earthenwarek'li. If the majority was from the turds, it is not susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 5
When pure metal keilim were coated with an impure coating, they are impure. If, however, one fashions keilim from an impure coating, they are pure.
Halacha 6
When the thick side of a hatchet was made from pure iron and its blade from impure metal, it is impure. If the blade was made from pure metal and the thick side from impure metal, it is pure. The status of the entire tool is determined by that of the portion with which work is performed.
Halacha 7
A pure hatchet that was coated with impure iron is pure.
Halacha 8
When the mouth of a pitcher was made from impure metal and its base from pure metal, it is pure. When it was made of pure metal and its base from impure metal, it is impure, because the status of the entire implement is determined by that of the container, for it is the portion with which the task is performed.
Halacha 9
When a metalk'li contracted impurity of Rabbinic origin, e.g., it contracted impurity from a false divinity or the like, then it was broken, melted down, and fashioned into a differentk'li, there is an unresolved doubt whether it returns to its former impurity or not.
Halacha 10
When glass keilim became impure and then broke, they are pure like all otherkeilim. Even if they were melted down and new keilim were made from them, they do not return to their former impurity. The rationale is that, as we explained, their impurity is primarily of Rabbinic origin. Hence, it was not decreed that they return to their former impurity.
Similarly, if glass utensils were broken, even though the broken pieces are themselves keilim and fit to be used, since they are components of broken utensils, they are not susceptible to impurity, because they do not resemble earthenware keilim.
What is implied? When a glass bowl is broken and one made its base fit to be used as a k'li, the base is not susceptible to impurity, even though it is like a bowl. If one leveled the broken portion and filed it down, it is susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 11
When the mouth of a small bottle that can be carried with one hand is removed, it is still susceptible to impurity, because one does not use it by inserting one's hand in it, but by pouring from it. By contrast, when the mouth of a large bottle that is held with both hands is removed, it is pure, because it will injure one's hand when it is inserted within it. Similarly, even though a flask of perfume is small, if its mouth is removed, it is pure, because it would injure one's finger when one removes the perfume from it.
Halacha 12
Large pitchers whose mouths were removed are still considered keilim because they are used for pickling.
Halacha 13
When the major portion of a glass cup is damaged, it is pure. If a third of the circumference over the major portion of its height is damaged, it is pure. If a hole was made in it and he plugged it with tin or tar, it is pure. When a hole was made in a cup or a bottle, whether in its upper portion or its lower portion, it is pure.
Halacha 14
When a hole was made in the upper portion of a large pot or a bowl, it is impure. If it is in its lower portion, it is pure. If such utensils are cracked, but can still contain hot liquids just as cold liquids, they are impure. If not, they are pure.
Halacha 15
Large containers whose mouths were removed are still considered as keilimbecause they are used to pickle produce.
Halacha 16
A glass dispenser is pure, because it is like a distributor, for it is not a container.
Halacha 17
When a glass item is used as a pane, it is pure, even if it can contain liquids, because it was not made to serve as a container. A glass ladle is considered as a container even though when it is placed on a table, it will turn to its side and not serve as a container; it is still susceptible to impurity.
Halacha 18
When a glass pot is made into a pane, it remains susceptible to impurity. If it was made intentionally for the purpose of sight, i.e., that the objects placed inside of it could be seen from its other side, it is pure. All glass utensils are not susceptible to ritual impurity until the tasks to fashion them are completed, as is true with regard to other utensils.
Kelim - Chapter 13
Halacha 1
In several places, we have already explained that an earthenware container contracts impurity only from its inner space or when moved by a zav. In contrast, all other keilim contract impurity when touched by impurity, but if impurity enters their inner space without touching them, they remain pure.
Thus what makes an earthenware container impure leaves other keilim pure. And what makes other keilim impure, leaves an earthenware container pure, for an earthenware container contracts impurity only from its inner space, asLeviticus 11:33 states: "Any earthenware container into whose inner space one of these will fall." It contracts impurity from its inner space and not from its outer side.
Halacha 2
Just as it contracts impurity from its inner space, so too, it imparts impurity to food and liquids from its inner space. What is implied?
When food and/or liquids enter the inner space of an earthenware container that contracted impurity, they contract impurity even though they never touched, as ibid. states: "Everything inside it shall contract impurity." Other impure keilim do not impart impurity to an impure k'li unless they touch it.
Halacha 3
An earthenware container does not impart impurity to keilim - whether earthenware keilim or other keilim - through their entry into its inner space.
What is implied? When there is a large earthenware container with other containers in it and impurity enters its inner space, it contracts impurity, but all the containers inside of it remain pure. If there also were liquids inside of them, the liquids contract impurity because of their presence within the inner space of the large container and they then impart impurity to the smaller containers. It is as the smaller containers say: "The one that imparted impurity to you did not impart impurity to me, but you imparted impurity to me."
Halacha 4
When impure liquids touch only the outer surface of an earthenware container, its outer surface contracts impurity like other keilim.
When does the above apply? When it is a container that has inner space. If, however, it is an implement that does not have inner space and impure liquids touch it, it is pure. For the outer surface of any earthenware k'li that does not have inner space does not contract impurity from liquids.
If foods or liquids touch the outer surface of an impure earthenware container, they are impure. Earthenware containers and other keilim are governed by the same laws in this context. For when foods or liquids touch any impure utensil whether on its inner surface or its outer surface, they contract impurity.
Halacha 5
The same laws that apply when impurity enters the inner space of an earthenware container apply when one turns it over, covering impurity that is lying on the ground and serving as a tent over it, for the impurity is within its inner space. According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that the phrase, ibid.,"into whose inner space" also includes containers that serve as tents.
Halacha 6
When there is a pit with the carcass of a crawling animal inside of it and an earthenware container is turned over the pit, it does not contract impurity. For the phrase "Within its inner space" implies that the impurity itself must enter its inner space.
For this reason, if the carcass of a crawling animal is found beneath the earth below an oven, the oven is pure, for we assume that it was alive when it fell into the pit and it died while in that pit. Similarly, if a needle or a ring is found beneath the earth below an oven, the oven is pure even though any keilim that are found are considered impure, as we explained. For we assume that thekeilim were there before the oven was placed there and the oven was built over them without them having fallen inside of it. If these keilim were found in the ash removed from the oven, the oven is impure, because there is nothing on which the person can base a supposition for leniency.
The following laws apply if these keilim were found in the earth below an oven; they were visible, but did not enter the inner space of the oven. If when one bakes dough, they will touch it, the oven is impure as if they were within its inner space. If not, the oven is pure as if they were beneath the earth below it. Concerning what type of dough was this said? An ordinary dough that was neither overly soft, nor overly firm.
Halacha 7
The following laws apply if the carcass of a crawling animal was found in the eye of an oven, the eye of a range for two pots, or the eye of a range for one pot. If the crawling animal was within the inner edge of the hole or further toward the outside, the oven or range is pure, because it did not enter the inner space of the oven or the range. Instead, it is suspended below the thickness of its walls. The oven or the range is pure even if an olive-sized portion of a human corpse is found in that place unless the opening of the eye is a handbreadth. In the latter instance, the oven would be impure because a hole of that size brings impurity to the inner space of the oven, as explained with regard to the impurity of a human corpse.
Halacha 8
When the carcass of a crawling animal is found in the place where wood is placed, if it is found from the inner edge of the range and further outward, the range is pure. If it is found in the place where the bath attendant sits or the dyer sits, or the place where those who cook olives sit, everything is pure.
Halacha 9
Neither an oven, a range, nor other places of cooking contract impurity unless the impurity is found from the sealing and inward.
Halacha 10
There are earthenware containers from which homeowners drink water that have an earthenware screen in their center and projections like a comb above that screen. It is called a tzirtzur. If impurity entered the space enclosed by the comb above the screen, the entire k'li is impure, for this is "the inner space" of this container.
Halacha 11
The following laws apply when there is an earthenware container that has three walls, one further inside than the other. If the interior wall was the highest and impurity entered its inner space, all foods and liquids that are in the space between the inner wall and middle wall or the outer wall are pure. If the middle wall was the highest and its inner space became impure, the area from this wall inward is impure. The area outside of it is pure. If the exterior wall was the highest and its inner space became impure, everything is impure. If the walls are of the same height, any enclosure whose inner space contracts impurity is impure and the remainder are pure.
Halacha 12
If several frying pans are placed one inside the other and their rims are of the same height, should the carcass of a crawling animal be found in the uppermost frying pan or the lowest one, the frying pan containing the carcass is impure and the other frying pans and the food inside of them are pure.
If all of the frying pans had a hole that would allow liquid to seep in and the carcass was in the uppermost one, all of the foods and liquids in all the frying pans are impure, because the impurity is considered in the inner space of all of them, as will be explained. If the impurity was in the bottom one, it is impure and all the others are pure, because the carcass of the crawling animal did not enter the inner space of the uppermost one and the rim of the lowest one is not higher than it, so that it would impart impurity to all the food and liquids contained in it.
If the carcass was located in the uppermost one and the rim of the lower one was higher, the uppermost one is impure, because the carcass is located within it. Similarly, the bottom one is impure, because its rim is higher and thus the carcass is in its inner space. The remainder of the frying pans that are located in the bottom one are pure, because an earthenware container does not impart impurity to other keilim inside of it. If there was liquid that could be felt between the frying pans, any pan that has liquid on it contracts impurity. For the liquid contracts impurity because of its presence in the inner space of the bottom pan whose edges extend above the higher pan. It then imparts impurity to the pan that it touches.
Halacha 13
When an earthenware tabletop had bowls attached to it from the time that it was initially made, although it is all a single k'li, if one bowl contracts impurity, they all do not contract impurity. If the table top has an upraised border, all of the bowls are considered in its inner space. Thus if one contracts impurity, they all become impure. Similar laws apply to an earthenware spice box and a split inkwell that are made in analogous manner.
Halacha 14
When one of the compartments of a wooden spice box contracts impurity from liquids, the remainder of its compartments do not contract impurity. If it has an upraised border and thus all of the compartments are considered within its inner space and one of them contracts impurity from liquids, they all contract impurity, for it is considered as a single container and when the inner space of a container contracts impurity from liquids, the entire container becomes impure.
If the compartments were attached to it by nails, they are considered as joined both with regard to contracting impurity and with regard to sprinkling the ashes of the red heifer. If they are merely wedged together, they are considered as joined with regard to contracting impurity, but not with regard to sprinkling the ashes of the red heifer. If the compartments could be easily removed and returned, they are not considered as joined, neither with regard to contracting impurity, nor with regard to sprinkling the ashes of the red heifer.
Kelim - Chapter 14
Halacha 1
Any entity that protects from ritual impurity as a sealed covering in a structure that is impure because of a human corpse, protects from ritual impurity as a sealed covering in the inner space of an earthenware container. If it can prevent an entity from contracting ritual impurity from a severe form of impurity, i.e., a structure that is impure because of a human corpse, it can be assumed that it will also prevent impurity in the more lenient instance of an earthenware container. Any entity that does not protect from ritual impurity in a structure that is impure because of a human corpse, does not protect from ritual impurity in the inner space of an earthenware container.
Halacha 2
Just as a sealed covering does not prevent impurity from escaping in a structure that is impure because of] a human corpse, so too, it does not prevent impurity from escaping into the inner space of an earthenware container.
What is implied? If a pot was filled with food and liquids and sealed closed and placed in an impure oven, the pot and its contents are pure. When the pot contained the carcass of a crawling animal or impure liquids, even though it is sealed closed, if it is placed in the inner space of an oven, the oven contracts impurity. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 3
When an impure ring was enclosed within a brick or an impure needle was enclosed within a block of wood that fell into the inner space of an earthenware container, it contracts impurity. Even though a loaf of bread that is terumah that would touch this wood or brick would be pure, these articles impart impurity to an earthenware container by virtue of their presence in its inner space.
Halacha 4
When a rooster swallows the carcass of a crawling animal or flesh from a human corpse and falls into the inner space of an oven, the oven is pure. If the rooster dies there, the oven contracts impurity. The rationale is that the fact that these entities were swallowed by a living being generates protection from the impurity in an earthenware container, just as it generates protection from impurity in a structure that is impure because of a human corpse.
Halacha 5
Entities in a person's mouth or in the folds of his body are not considered as swallowed.
What is implied? A person had impure liquids in his mouth. If he closes his mouth and inserts his head into the inner space of an earthenware container, he imparts impurity to it. Similarly, if a pure person who had food and liquids in his mouth inserted his head into the inner space of an impure oven, the food and the liquids in his mouth contract impurity. If he had a lentil-sized portion of the carcass of a crawling animal and inserted it in the inner space of an oven, the oven contracts impurity even though the source of impurity is found in the folds of the person's body.
Halacha 6
When a sponge absorbed impure liquids, even though its surface is dry, if it fell into the inner space of an earthenware container, it imparts impurity to the container, because ultimately, the impurity will emerge. Similar laws apply to a piece of turnip or a reed.
When shards that were used for impure liquids became dry and fell into the inner space of an earthenware container, they do not impart impurity to it. If they fell into an oven and it was heated, they impart impurity to it, because ultimately, the liquids will emerge.
When does the above apply? With regard to impure liquids of a lesser severity. When, however, the impurity of the liquids is severe, e.g., the blood of a woman in the nidah state or her urine, if it is possible that they will emerge and the person is concerned that they emerge, they impart impurity to the oven even if was not heated. If he is not concerned that they emerge, they do not impart impurity until the oven is heated and the liquid emerges.
Similarly, when new olive dregs that come from impure liquids are used as kindling fuel for an oven, it contracts impurity, for, ultimately, the liquids will emerge. If, however, the olive dregs are old, the oven is pure. When are dregs considered old? After twelve months. When, however, it is known that liquids will emerge from the dregs when the oven will be heated, the oven contracts impurity when heated even if the dregs are three years old.
Halacha 7
Even though an earthenware container was divided with a partition extending from its rim until its bottom, if impurity enters the inner space of one of the portions, the entire container contracts impurity. The rationale is that it is not common practice for people to divide earthenware containers as they divide structures. Therefore, if an oven is divided with boards or curtains and the carcass of a crawling animal is found in one place, the entire oven is impure.
Halacha 8
When a container in which impurity was located was inserted into the inner space of an earthenware container, if the edge of the impure container extends outside the earthenware container, the earthenware container is ritually pure even though the impurity is positioned inside of it, for Leviticus 11:33 states: "Into whose inner space one of these will fall." Implied is that the presence of impurity in the inner space of a container conveys impurity but not its presence in the inner space of a container in the inner space of a second container.
Halacha 9
A similar concept applies if there was an impure earthenware container and another container holding food or liquids was inserted into its inner space. If the edges of the other container extend beyond the impure earthenware container, the food and the liquids remain pure. This is derived from the continuation of the above verse: "Everything in its inner space shall contract impurity," i.e., "in its inner space," and not in the inner space of a container in its inner space.
What is implied? When a bee-hive shaped container, a basket, a pot, a flask, or the like contained the carcass of a crawling animal and then one lowered the basket or the like into the inner space of a barrel or into the inner space of an oven, even though the carcass of the crawling animal is positioned inside the inner space of the barrel or the oven since the edge of the basket or the flask extends above the edge of the barrel or the edge of the oven, the barrel or the oven is pure. In such a situation, if there were pure food or liquids in a flask, in a pot, or the like and one lowered them into the inner space of an impure oven or barrel, the food and liquids are pure.
If, however, the bee-hive shaped container, the basket, the flask, or the like had a hole, they do not save entities from ritual impurity. Instead, if they contained the carcass of a crawling animal and they were lowered into the inner space of a pure earthenware container, it contracts impurity. If there were pure food or liquids and one lowered them into the inner space of an impure earthenware container, the food and the liquids contract impurity.
How large must the hole be for these laws to apply? In keilim that can be purified by immersion: large enough for an olive to fall out. If it was an earthenware container made to hold foods, the measure of the hole is: enough for olives to fall out. If it was intended to hold liquids, the measure is: enough for liquids to seep in when the container is placed in them. If it was made for both these purposes, it is judged stringently and when this earthenware container has a hole large enough for liquids to seep in, it does not save entities from impurity when inserted in the inner space of an earthenware container.
Halacha 10
The following rules apply if one sealed a hole in an earthenware container with tar. If the carcass of a crawling animal was in such a container and it was lowered into the inner space of a pure oven, the oven contracts impurity. For a sealed covering does not protect entities from contracting impurity, as we explained.
If, however, this container held pure food or liquids and it was lowered into the inner space of an impure oven, the food and the liquids are pure, because the hole has been sealed. When holes in all other types of containers were sealed close with tar and the like, they do not protect their contents from contracting ritual impurity from an earthenware container.
Halacha 11
When a bee-hive shaped container has an opening, even though the opening was closed with straw, it no longer protects its contents from contracting impurity from an earthenware container, because it is not a container.
Halacha 12
Although a flask or stone container was opened to the extent that a pomegranate would fall from them - and thus they were no longer considered in the category of keilim - they still save entities from contracting impurity due to their presence in the inner space of an earthenware container, provided the opening is above the outer edge of the earthenware container and the receptacle is lowered within the inner space of the earthenware container.
Halacha 13
When a simple hide or the like is hanging into the inner space of an earthenware container or into the inner space of an oven and there is a carcass of a crawling animal on the hide, the oven contracts impurity. If the carcass was inside the oven, any food or liquids on the hide are impure. The rationale is that the only type of entity that can prevent impurity from spreading due to the inner space of an earthenware container is a container that has a receptacle, e.g., a basket, a bin, or a flask.
Halacha 14
When there is impurity in the inner space of an earthenware container and there was another pure earthenware container turned upside and resting on the impure container, even though their inner space is combined, the impure one is impure and the pure one is pure. This same ruling applies if the impurity was attached to the wall of one container and it was overturned and resting on a pure container. The rationale is that the impurity itself has not entered the inner space of the pure earthenware container.
Therefore, if a barrel that was filled with pure liquids was found below an oven and the carcass of a crawling animal fell into the oven, the barrel and the liquids are pure, even though the inner space of the oven is combined with the inner space of the barrel. Similarly, if the barrel is turned facing the opening of the oven and its mouth opens to the inner space of the oven, even the liquid at the base of the barrel is pure.
• Tuesday, Menachem Av 19, 5775 · 04 August 2015
"Today's Day"
Friday Menachem Av 19 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Eikev, Shishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 90-96.
Tanya: Now, with (p. 415) ...is to Abraham." (p. 415).
Those who daven with four pairs of tefillin follow this procedure:
1. Put on Rashi hand - and head - tefillin before saying Chapter Eizehu (p. 23), and daven in them until after ach tzadikim... (p. 85).
2. Remove the Rashi tefillin from the head and put on - without a b'racha - Shimusha Raba tefillin for the head. Recite sh'ma... until emet; then recite the daily portion of Tehillim (as the Tehillim is divided into the days of the month). The meticulous would study those chapters with the commentaries of Rashi and Metzudot.
3. Then put on - without a b'racha - Rabeinu Tam tefillin,1 recite sh'ma... until emet, then chapter Kadeish... (p. 85) and the Remembrances printed in the Siddur (p. 86). Then study a chapter of Mishna, each according to his comprehension.
4. Remove the Rabeinu Tam tefillin from the head and put on the Ra'avad tefillin for the head - without a b'racha. Recitesh'ma... until emet; study the day's portion of Chumash with the commentary of Rashi - on Sunday (the first parsha) until sheini,Monday the second parsha, etc.
FOOTNOTES
1. It is critical to note that the Rebbe of righteous memory has instructed and requested all of Bar-mitzva age and older to regularly put on Rabeinu Tam tefillin. Viz. sichot of Purim 5736, Motza'ei Va'eira 5739, Pekudei 5741.
Daily Thought:
The Drama
All the cosmos came to be because G‑d chose to invest His very essence into a great drama: the drama of a lowly world becoming the home of an infinite G‑d. A marriage of opposites, the fusion of finite and infinite, light and darkness, heaven and earth.
We are the players in that drama, the cosmic matchmakers. With our every action, we have the power to marry our mundane world to the Infinite and Unknowable.[Sefer HaSichot 5750, vol. 1, pp. 103ff.]
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment