Daily Quote:
I shall be sanctified amidst the children of Israel.[Leviticus 22:32]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Ki Tisa, 1st Portion Exodus 30:11-31:17 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 30
11The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: יאוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
12"When you take the sum of the children of Israel according to their numbers, let each one give to the Lord an atonement for his soul when they are counted; then there will be no plague among them when they are counted. יבכִּ֣י תִשָּׂ֞א אֶת־רֹ֥אשׁ בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֘ לִפְקֻֽדֵיהֶם֒ וְנָ֨תְנ֜וּ אִ֣ישׁ כֹּ֧פֶר נַפְשׁ֛וֹ לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה בִּפְקֹ֣ד אֹתָ֑ם וְלֹא־יִֽהְיֶ֥ה בָהֶ֛ם נֶ֖גֶף בִּפְקֹ֥ד אֹתָֽם:
When you take: Heb. כִּי תִשָׂא. [This is] an expression of taking, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders. [I.e.,] when you wish to take the sum [total] of their numbers to know how many they are, do not count them by the head, but each one shall give a half-shekel, and you shall count the shekels. [Thereby] you will know their number. כי תשא: לשון קבלה, כתרגומו, כשתחפוץ לקבל סכום מנינם לדעת כמה הם, אל תמנם לגלגולת, אלא יתנו כל אחד מחצית השקל ותמנה את השקלים ותדע מנינם:
then there will be no plague among them: for the evil eye has power over numbered things, and pestilence comes upon them, as we find in David’s time (II Sam. 24). ולא יהיה בהם נגף: שהמנין שולט בו עין הרע והדבר בא עליהם, כמו שמצינו בימי דוד:
13This they shall give, everyone who goes through the counting: half a shekel according to the holy shekel. Twenty gerahs equal one shekel; half of [such] a shekel shall be an offering to the Lord. יגזֶ֣ה | יִתְּנ֗וּ כָּל־הָֽעֹבֵר֙ עַל־הַפְּקֻדִ֔ים מַֽחֲצִ֥ית הַשֶּׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ עֶשְׂרִ֤ים גֵּרָה֙ הַשֶּׁ֔קֶל מַֽחֲצִ֣ית הַשֶּׁ֔קֶל תְּרוּמָ֖ה לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
This they shall give: He [God] showed him [Moses] a sort of coin of fire weighing half a shekel, and He said to him, “Like this one they shall give.” -[from Tanchuma 9; Tanchuma Buber, Naso p. 35; Pesikta d’Rav Kahana 19a; Midrash Psalms 91:1; Yerushalmi, Shekalim 1:4] זה יתנו: הראה לו כמין מטבע של אש, ומשקלה מחצית השקל, ואומר לו כזה יתנו:
who goes through the counting: Heb. הָעֹבֵר עַל-הַפְקֻדִים. It is customary for those who count to pass the ones who have been counted one following another, and so [too the word יַעִבֹר in] “each one that passes under the rod” (Lev. 27:32), and so [the word ךְתַּעִבֹרְנָה in] “flocks will again pass under the hands of one who counts them” (Jer. 33:13). העבר על הפקודים: דרך המונין מעבירין את הנמנין זה אחר זה, וכן לשון (ויקרא כז לב) כל אשר יעבור תחת השבט, וכן (ירמיה לג יג) תעבורנה הצאן על ידי מונה:
half a shekel according to the holy shekel: By the weight of the shekel that I fixed for you [against which] to weigh the holy shekels, such as the shekels mentioned in the section dealing with personal evaluations (Lev. 27:1-8) and [in the section concerning] inherited fields (Lev. 27:16-21). מחצית השקל בשקל הקודש: במשקל השקל שקצבתי לך לשקול בו שקלי הקדש, כגון שקלים האמורין בפרשת ערכין ושדה אחוזה:
Twenty gerahs equal one shekel: Now He explains to you how much it is. עשרים גרה השקל: עכשיו פירש לך כמה הוא:
gerahs: Heb. גֵרָה, a word meaning a ma’ah [a small coin]. Likewise, “will come to prostrate himself before him for a silver piece (אִגוֹרַתכֶּסֶף) and a morsel of bread” (I Sam. 2:36). גרה: לשון מעה, וכן בשמואל (בשמואל א' ב לו) יבוא להשתחות לו לאגורת כסף וככר לחם:
Twenty gerahs equal one shekel: for a whole shekel equals four zuzim, and the zuz was originally five ma’oth, but they came and added a sixth to it and raised it to six ma’oth of silver, and half of this shekel [of] which I have spoken to you [here in this verse], they shall give as an offering to the Lord. עשרים גרה השקל: השקל השלם, שהשקל ארבעה זוזים, והזוז מתחלתו חמש מעות, אלא באו והוסיפו עליו שתות והעלוהו לשש מעה כסף, ומחצית השקל הזה, שאמרתי לך, יתנו תרומה לה':
14Everyone who goes through the counting, from the age of twenty and upward, shall give an offering to the Lord. ידכֹּ֗ל הָֽעֹבֵר֙ עַל־הַפְּקֻדִ֔ים מִבֶּ֛ן עֶשְׂרִ֥ים שָׁנָ֖ה וָמָ֑עְלָה יִתֵּ֖ן תְּרוּמַ֥ת יְהֹוָֽה:
from the age of twenty and upward: [The Torah] teaches you here that no one under twenty years old goes out [to serve] in the army or is counted among men. מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה: למדך כאן, שאין פחות מבן עשרים יוצא לצבא ונמנה בכלל אנשים:
15The rich shall give no more, and the poor shall give no less than half a shekel, with which to give the offering to the Lord, to atone for your souls. טוהֶֽעָשִׁ֣יר לֹֽא־יַרְבֶּ֗ה וְהַדַּל֙ לֹ֣א יַמְעִ֔יט מִמַּֽחֲצִ֖ית הַשָּׁ֑קֶל לָתֵת֙ אֶת־תְּרוּמַ֣ת יְהֹוָ֔ה לְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶֽם:
to atone for your souls: That they should not be struck by a plague because of the counting. Another explanation: לכפר על נפשתיכם: שלא תנגפו על ידי המנין. דבר אחר לכפר על נפשותיכם, לפי שרמז להם כאן שלש תרומות, שנכתב כאן תרומת ה' שלוש פעמים אחת תרומת א-דנים, שמנאן כשהתחילו בנדבת המשכן ונתנו כל אחד ואחד מחצית השקל, ועלה למאת ככר, שנאמר (שמות לח כה) וכסף פקודי העדה מאת ככר, ומהם נעשו הא-דנים, שנאמר (שמות לח כז) ויהי מאת ככר הכסף וגו'. והשנית אף היא על ידי מנין שמנאן, משהוקם המשכן, הוא המנין האמור בתחלת חומש הפקודים (במדבר א א) באחד לחדש השני בשנה השנית, ונתנו כל אחד מחצית השקל, והן לקנות מהן קרבנות צבור של כל שנה ושנה, והושוו בהם עניים ועשירים, ועל אותה תרומה נאמר לכפר על נפשותיכם, שהקרבנות לכפרה הם באים. והשלישית היא תרומת המשכן, כמו שנאמר (שמות לה כד) כל מרים תרומת כסף ונחשת, ולא היתה יד כולם שוה בה, אלא איש איש מה שנדבו לבו:
to atone for your souls: [This was written] because [God] hinted to them [the Israelites] here [about] three offerings, because “an offering to the Lord” is written here three times. The first [represents] the offering [of silver] for the sockets [of the Mishkan], for he [Moses] counted them when they commenced with the donations for the Mishkan. Everyone gave a half-shekel, amounting to one hundred talents, as it is said: “And the silver of the community census was one hundred talents” (Exod. 38:25). The sockets were made from this, as it is said: “One hundred talents of the silver was [used to cast the sockets of the Mishkan and the sockets of the dividing curtain]” (Exod. 38:27). The second [offering mentioned here] was also [collected] through counting, for he [Moses] counted them after the Mishkan was erected. This is the counting mentioned in the beginning of the Book of Numbers: “on the first of the second month in the second year” (Num. 1:1). [For this offering] everyone gave a half-shekel, [the total of] which was [earmarked] for the purchase of communal sacrifices for every year. The rich and poor were equal in them [i.e., they gave equally in these two offerings]. Concerning that [second] offering, it is said: “to atone for your souls,” because the sacrifices are brought for the purpose of atonement. The third one [offering] is the offering for the Mishkan, as it is said: “Whoever set aside an offering of silver or copper” (Exod. 35:24). In this [offering] not everyone gave the same amount, but each one [gave] according to what his heart inspired him to give. -[from Shekalim 2b] :
16You shall take the silver of the atonements from the children of Israel and use it for the work of the Tent of Meeting; it shall be a remembrance for the children of Israel before the Lord, to atone for your souls." טזוְלָֽקַחְתָּ֞ אֶת־כֶּ֣סֶף הַכִּפֻּרִ֗ים מֵאֵת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְנָֽתַתָּ֣ אֹת֔וֹ עַל־עֲבֹדַ֖ת אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד וְהָיָה֩ לִבְנֵ֨י יִשְׂרָאֵ֤ל לְזִכָּרוֹן֙ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה לְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶֽם:
and use it for the work of the Tent of Meeting: [From this] you learn that they were commanded to count them at the beginning of the donation for the Mishkan after the incident of the calf. [They were commanded then] because a plague had befallen them, as it is said: “And the Lord plagued the people” (Exod. 32:35). This can be compared to a flock of sheep, treasured by its owner, which was stricken with pestilence. When it [the pestilence] was over, he [the owner] said to the shepherd, “Please count my sheep to know how many are left,” in order to make it known that he treasured it [the flock] (Tanchuma, Ki Thissa 9). It is, however, impossible to say that this counting [mentioned here] was the [same] one mentioned in the Book of Numbers, for in that one [counting] it says: “on the first of the second month” (Num. 1:1), and the Mishkan was erected on the first [day] of the first month, as it is said: On the day of the first month, on the first of the month, you shall erect, etc. (Exod. 40:2). The sockets were made from shekels realized from that counting, as it is said: “One hundred talents of the silver were used to cast, etc.” (Exod. 38:27). Thus you learn that they [the countings] were two-one at the beginning of their donation [to the Mishkan] after Yom Kippur in the first year [after the Exodus], and one in the second year in Iyar after the Mishkan had been erected. Now if you ask, how is it possible that in both of these countings the Israelites equaled six hundred three thousand, five hundred fifty? In the case of the silver of the community census, it says this number, and also in the Book of Numbers it says the same: “And all the counted ones were six hundred three thousand, five hundred fifty” (Num. 1:46). Were they [the countings] not in two [separate] years? It is impossible that in the first census there were none who were nineteen years old and consequently not counted, and by the second counting became twenty years old [and were counted]. The answer to this matter is that in the context of the ages of people, they were counted in the same year, but in the context of the Exodus they [the two dates] were two [separate] years, since [to figure the time] from the Exodus, we count from [the month of] Nissan, as we learned in [tractate] Rosh Hashanah (2b). In this context, the Mishkan was built in the first year [after the Exodus] and erected in the second year, for the new year started on the first of Nissan. People’s ages, however, are counted according to the number of years of the world, beginning with [the month of] Tishri. Thus, the two countings were [taken] in the same year. The first counting was in Tishri after Yom Kippur, when the Omnipresent was placated toward Israel to forgive them, and they were commanded concerning [building] the Mishkan. The second one [counting] was on the first of Iyar. -[from Num. Rabbah 1:10] ונתת אתו על עבודת אהל מועד: למדת שנצטוה למנותם בתחלת נדבת המשכן אחר מעשה העגל, מפני שנכנס בהם מגפה, כמו שנאמר (שמות לב לה) ויגוף ה' את העם. משל לצאן החביבה על בעליה, שנפל בה דבר, ומשפסק אמר לו לרועה בבקשה ממך, מנה את צאני ודע כמה נותרו בהם, להודיע שהיא חביבה עליו. ואי אפשר לומר, שהמנין הזה הוא האמור בחומש הפקודים, שהרי נאמר בו (במדבר א א) באחד לחדש השני, והמשכן הוקם באחד לחודש הראשון, שנאמר (שמות מ ב) ביום החודש הראשון באחד לחודש תקים וגו', ומהמנין הזה נעשו הא-דנים משקלים שלו, שנאמר (שמות לח כז) ויהי מאת ככר הכסף לצקת וגו', הא למדת שתים היו אחת בתחלת נדבתן אחר יום הכפורים בשנה ראשונה, ואחת בשנה שנייה באייר משהוקם המשכן. ואם תאמר, וכי אפשר שבשניהם היו ישראל שוים שש מאות אלף ושלשת אלפים וחמש מאות וחמישים, שהרי בכסף פקודי העדה נאמר כן, ובחומש הפקודים אף בו נאמר כן (במדבר א מו) ויהיו כל הפקודים שש מאות אלף ושלשת אלפים וחמש מאות וחמשים, והלא בשתי שנים היו, ואי אפשר שלא היו בשעת מנין הראשון בני תשע עשרה שנה שלא נמנו ובשנייה נעשו בני עשרים. תשובה לדבר, אצל שנות האנשים בשנה אחת נמנו, אבל למנין יציאת מצרים היו שתי שנים, לפי שליציאת מצרים מונין מניסן, כמו ששנינו במסכת ראש השנה (ב ב), ונבנה המשכן בראשונה והוקם בשנייה שנתחדשה שנה באחד בניסן, אבל שנות האנשים מנוין למנין שנות עולם המתחילין מתשרי, נמצאו שני המנינים בשנה אחת המנין הראשון היה בתשרי לאחר יום הכפורים, שנתרצה המקום לישראל לסלוח להם, ונצטוו על המשכן, והשני באחד באייר:
for the work of the Tent of Meeting: These are the sockets made from it [i.e., from the silver of the atonements]. על עבודת אהל מועד: הן הא-דנים שנעשו בו:
17The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: יזוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
18"You shall make a washstand of copper and its base of copper for washing, and you shall place it between the Tent of Meeting and the altar, and you shall put water therein. יחוְעָשִׂ֜יתָ כִּיּ֥וֹר נְח֛שֶׁת וְכַנּ֥וֹ נְח֖שֶׁת לְרָחְצָ֑ה וְנָֽתַתָּ֣ אֹת֗וֹ בֵּֽין־אֹ֤הֶל מוֹעֵד֙ וּבֵ֣ין הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ וְנָֽתַתָּ֥ שָׁ֖מָּה מָֽיִם:
a washstand: Like a sort of large caldron, which has faucets allowing water to pour out through their openings. כיור: כמין דוד גדולה ולה דדים המריקים בפיהם מים:
and its base: Heb. וְכַנּוֹ, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: וּבְסִיסֵיהּ, a seat prepared for the washstand. וכנו: כתרגומו ובסיסיה, מושב מתוקן לכיור:
for washing: This refers back to the washstand. לרחצה: מוסב על הכיור:
between… the altar: [This refers to] the altar for burnt offerings, about which it is written that it was in front of the entrance of the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting. The washstand was drawn away slightly [from the entrance] and stood opposite the space between the altar and the Mishkan, but it did not intervene at all [between them], because it is said: “And he placed the altar for burnt offerings at the entrance of the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting” (Exod. 40:29), implying that the altar was in front of the Tent of Meeting, but the washstand was not in front of the Tent of Meeting. How is that so? It [the washstand] was drawn away slightly to the south. So it is taught in Zev. (59a). ובין המזבח: מזבח העולה שכתוב בו, שהוא לפני פתח משכן אהל מועד, והיה הכיור משוך קמעא ועומד כנגד אויר שבין המזבח והמשכן, ואינו מפסיק כלל בינתים, משום שנאמר (שמות מ כט) ואת מזבח העולה שם פתח משכן אהל מועד, כלומר מזבח לפני אהל מועד ואין כיור לפני אהל מועד, הא כיצד, משוך קמעא כלפי הדרום, כך שנויה בזבחים (נט א):
19Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and feet from it. יטוְרָֽחֲצ֛וּ אַֽהֲרֹ֥ן וּבָנָ֖יו מִמֶּ֑נּוּ אֶת־יְדֵיהֶ֖ם וְאֶת־רַגְלֵיהֶֽם:
their hands and feet: He [the kohen] would wash his hands and feet simultaneously. So we learned in Zev. (19b): How was the washing of the hands and the feet [performed]? [The kohen] would lay his right hand on his right foot and his left hand on his left foot and wash [in this manner]. את ידיהם ואת רגליהם: בבת אחת היה מקדש ידיו ורגליו, וכך שנינו בזבחים (יט ב) כיצד קדוש ידים ורגלים, מניח ידו הימנית על גבי רגלו הימנית, וידו השמאלית על גבי רגלו השמאלית, ומקדש:
20When they enter the Tent of Meeting, they shall wash with water so that they will not die; or when they approach the altar to serve, to make a fire offering rise up in smoke to the Lord, כבְּבֹאָ֞ם אֶל־אֹ֧הֶל מוֹעֵ֛ד יִרְחֲצוּ־מַ֖יִם וְלֹ֣א יָמֻ֑תוּ א֣וֹ בְגִשְׁתָּ֤ם אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֨חַ֙ לְשָׁרֵ֔ת לְהַקְטִ֥יר אִשֶּׁ֖ה לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
When they enter the Tent of Meeting: to bring the incense up in smoke in the morning and in the afternoon, or to sprinkle some of the blood of the bull of the anointed Kohen [Gadol, who erred in his halachic decision and practiced according to that erroneous decision,] (Lev. 4:3-12) and the blood of the kids for [sin offerings for having engaged in] idolatry (Num. 15:22-26). בבאם אל אהל מועד: להקטיר קטרת שחרית ובין הערבים, או להזות מדם פר כהן המשיח ושעירי עבודה זרה:
so that they will not die: This implies that if they do not wash, they will die. For in the Torah [there] are stated implications, and from the negative implication you [can] understand the positive. ולא ימותו: הא אם לא ירחצו ימותו, שבתורה נאמרו כללות, ומכלל לאו אתה שומע הן:
the altar: [I.e.,] the outer [altar], in which no entry to the Tent of Meeting is involved, only [entry] into the courtyard. אל המזבח: החיצון, שאין כאן ביאת אהל מועד אלא בחצר:
21they shall wash their hands and feet so that they will not die; this shall be for them a perpetual statute, for him and for his descendants, for their generations." כאוְרָֽחֲצ֛וּ יְדֵיהֶ֥ם וְרַגְלֵיהֶ֖ם וְלֹ֣א יָמֻ֑תוּ וְהָֽיְתָ֨ה לָהֶ֧ם חָק־עוֹלָ֛ם ל֥וֹ וּלְזַרְע֖וֹ לְדֹֽרֹתָֽם:
so that they will not die: [This verse is written] to impose death upon one who serves on the altar when his hands and feet are not washed, for from the first death penalty (verse 20) we understand only [that death is imposed] upon one who enters the Temple. ולא ימותו: לחייב מיתה על המשמש במזבח ואינו רחוץ ידים ורגלים, שהמיתה הראשונה לא שמענו אלא על הנכנס להיכל:
22The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: כבוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
23"And you, take for yourself spices of the finest sort: of pure myrrh five hundred [shekel weights]; of fragrant cinnamon half of it two hundred and fifty [shekel weights]; of fragrant cane two hundred and fifty [shekel weights], כגוְאַתָּ֣ה קַח־לְךָ֘ בְּשָׂמִ֣ים רֹאשׁ֒ מָר־דְּרוֹר֙ חֲמֵ֣שׁ מֵא֔וֹת וְקִנְּמָן־בֶּ֥שֶׂם מַֽחֲצִית֖וֹ חֲמִשִּׁ֣ים וּמָאתָ֑יִם וּקְנֵה־בֹ֖שֶׂם חֲמִשִּׁ֥ים וּמָאתָֽיִם:
spices of the finest sort: Heb. בְּשָׂמִים רֹאשׁ, of high quality. בשמים ראש: חשובים:
fragrant cinnamon: Since cinnamon is the bark of a tree, and there is one good type [of cinnamon] that has a fragrant bouquet and a good taste, and there is another that is merely like wood, it was necessary to state “fragrant cinnamon,” [meaning that the incense was to be made] of the good species. וקנמן בשם: לפי שהקנמון קליפת עץ הוא, יש שהוא טוב ויש בו ריח טוב וטעם, ויש שאינו אלא כעץ, לכך הוצרך לומר קנמן בשם, מן הטוב:
half of it two hundred and fifty [shekel weights]: Half of the amount to be brought shall be two hundred and fifty; thus altogether it is five hundred [shekel weights], like the amount of pure myrrh. If so, why was it stated in halves? This is a Scriptural decree to bring it in halves to add to it two overweights, because we do not weigh [the spices] exactly. So it was taught in Kereithoth (5a). מחציתו חמשים ומאתים: מחצית הבאתו תהא חמשים ומאתים, נמצא כולו חמש מאות, כמו שיעור מר דרור, אם כן, למה נאמר בו חצאין, גזירת הכתוב היא להביאו לחצאין, להרבות בו שתי הכרעות, שאין שוקלין עין בעין, וכך שנויה בכריתות (דף ה א):
fragrant cane: Heb. וּקְנֵה-בֹשֶׂם, cane of spice. Since there are canes that are not of spice, it is necessary to specify: בֹשֶׂם וקנה בשם: קנה של בשם לפי שיש קנים שאינן של בשם, הוצרך לומר בשם:
two hundred and fifty [shekel weights]: [This is] its total sum. חמשים ומאתים: סך משקל כולו:
24and of cassia five hundred [shekel weights] according to the holy shekel, and one hin of olive oil. כדוְקִדָּ֕ה חֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵא֖וֹת בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ וְשֶׁ֥מֶן זַ֖יִת הִֽין:
and of cassia: Heb. וְקִדָּה, the name of the root of an herb, and in the language of the Sages: קְצִיעָה, cassia. -[from Ker. 6a] וקדה: שם שורש עשב, ובלשון חכמים קציעה:
hin: [The equivalent of] twelve logs. The Sages of Israel differ concerning it [i.e., how the oil was made]. Rabbi Meir says: They [whoever made the anointing oil] boiled the roots in it [the oil of the anointment]. Rabbi Judah said to him: But is it not so that it [the anointment oil] did not even suffice to anoint the roots [and thus they certainly couldn’t boil the spices in the oil]? Rather, they soaked them [the spices] in water so that they would not absorb the oil, and then poured the oil on them until they were impregnated with the scent, and [then] they wiped the oil off the roots. -[from Ker. 5a] הין: שנים עשר לוגין, ונחלקו בו חכמי ישראל רבי מאיר אומר בו שלקו את העיקרין. אמר לו רבי יהודה והלא לסוך את העיקרין אינו סיפק, אלא שראום במים, שלא יבלעו את השמן, ואחר כך הציף עליהם השמן עד שקלט הריח וקפחו לשמן מעל העיקרין:
25You shall make this into an oil of holy annoinment, a perfumed compound according to the art of a perfumer; it shall be an oil of holy anointment. כהוְעָשִׂ֣יתָ אֹת֗וֹ שֶׁ֚מֶן מִשְׁחַת־קֹ֔דֶשׁ רֹ֥קַח מִרְקַ֖חַת מַֽעֲשֵׂ֣ה רֹקֵ֑חַ שֶׁ֥מֶן מִשְׁחַת־קֹ֖דֶשׁ יִֽהְיֶֽה:
a perfumed compound: Heb. רֹקַח מִרְקַחַת. רֹקַח is a noun, and the accent, which is on the first syllable, proves that. It is like רֶקַע רֶגַע, but it is not like “Who wrinkles (רֹגַע) the sea” (Isa. 51:15), or like “Who spread out (רֹקַע) the earth” (Isa. 42:5) [which are both verbs], because [in those instances] the accent is at the end of the word. Any substance mixed with another substance until one becomes impregnated from the other with either scent or taste is called מִרְקַחַת. רקח מרקחת: רקח שם דבר הוא, והטעם מוכיח שהוא למעלה, והרי הוא כמו רקח, רגע, ואינו כמו (ישעיה נא טו) רגע הים, וכמו (ישעיהו מב ה) רקע הארץ, שהטעם למטה, וכל דבר המעורב בחבירו, עד שזה קופח מזה או ריח או טעם קרוי מרקחת:
a perfumed compound: Heb. רֹקַח מִרְקַחַת, a compound made through the skill of mixing. רקח מרקחת: רקח העשוי על ידי אומנות ותערובות:
according to the art of a perfumer: Heb. רֹקֵחַ, the name of the craftsman in this field. מעשה רוקח: שם האומן בדבר:
26And you shall anoint with it the Tent of Meeting and the Ark of Testimony, כווּמָֽשַׁחְתָּ֥ ב֖וֹ אֶת־אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד וְאֵ֖ת אֲר֥וֹן הָֽעֵדֻֽת:
And you shall anoint with it: All anointments were in the shape of the Greek [letter] “chaff,” except those of the kings, which were like a sort of crown. -[from Ker. 5b] ומשחת בו: כל המשיחות כמין כי יונית, חוץ משל מלכים שהן כמין נזר:
27the table and all its implements, the menorah and its implements, the altar of incense, כזוְאֶת־הַשֻּׁלְחָן֙ וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֔יו וְאֶת־הַמְּנֹרָ֖ה וְאֶת־כֵּלֶ֑יהָ וְאֵ֖ת מִזְבַּ֥ח הַקְּטֹֽרֶת:
28the altar of the burnt offering and all its implements, the washstand and its base. כחוְאֶת־מִזְבַּ֥ח הָֽעֹלָ֖ה וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֑יו וְאֶת־הַכִּיֹּ֖ר וְאֶת־כַּנּֽוֹ:
29And you shall sanctify them so that they become a holy of holies; whatever touches them shall become holy. כטוְקִדַּשְׁתָּ֣ אֹתָ֔ם וְהָי֖וּ קֹ֣דֶשׁ קָֽדָשִׁ֑ים כָּל־הַנֹּגֵ֥עַ בָּהֶ֖ם יִקְדָּֽשׁ:
And you shall sanctify them: This anointment sanctifies them to be a holy of holies. And what is their sanctity? Whatever touches them shall become holy. [I.e.,] whatever is fit for [placement in] a service vessel, when it enters them [the vessels], it becomes intrinsically holy so that it becomes unfit [to be an offering] if it goes out [of its designated boundaries], if it stays [out] overnight, or if [it comes in contact with] a person who has immersed himself [from uncleanness] on that day, and it may not be redeemed to become ordinary [unsanctified] food. Something unfit for them [i.e., for the service vessels], however, they [the vessels] do not sanctify (Zev. 87a). This was taught as an explicit Mishnah concerning the altar [i.e., a Baraitha, Zev. 83b]: Since it is stated: “Whatever touches the altar will be holy” (Exod. 29:37), I understand it to mean whether it is fit or unfit. Therefore, [to clarify this,] the Torah states [that] lambs [are to be sacrificed upon the altar]. Because just as lambs are fit, so is anything else that is fit [sanctified if it comes in contact with the altar]. Every anointment of the Mishkan, the kohanim, and the kings is translated [by Onkelos] as an expression of greatness because there is no need to anoint them except in order to proclaim their greatness. So did the King [God] decree, that this [the anointment] is their initiation into greatness. Other anointments, however, such as anointed wafers, “and with the first oils they anoint themselves” (Amos 6:6), their Aramaic [translation] is the same as the Hebrew. וקדשת אותם: משיחה זו מקדשתם להיות קדש קדשים, ומה היא קדושתם, כל הנוגע וגו', כל הראוי לכלי שרת משנכנס לתוכו קדוש קדושת הגוף ליפסל ביוצא ובלינה ובטבול יום, ואינו נפדה לצאת לחולין, אבל דבר שאינו ראוי להם אין מקדשין. ושנויה היא משנה שלימה אצל מזבח, מתוך שנאמר (שמות כט לז) כל הנוגע במזבח יקדש, שומע אני בין ראוי בין שאינו ראוי, תלמוד לומר כבשים, מה כבשים ראויים אף כל ראוי. כל משיחת משכן וכהנים ומלכים מתורגם לשון רבוי, לפי שאין צורך משיחתן אלא לגדולה, כי כן יסד המלך, שזה חנוך גדולתן, ושאר משיחות כגון (שמות כט ב) רקיקין משוחין, (עמוס ו ו) וראשית שמנים ימשחו, לשון ארמית בהן כלשון עברית:
30And with it you shall anoint Aaron and his sons and sanctify them to serve Me [as kohanim]. לוְאֶת־אַֽהֲרֹ֥ן וְאֶת־בָּנָ֖יו תִּמְשָׁ֑ח וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ֥ אֹתָ֖ם לְכַהֵ֥ן לִֽי:
31And to the children of Israel you shall speak, saying: 'This shall be oil of holy anointment to Me for your generations. לאוְאֶל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל תְּדַבֵּ֣ר לֵאמֹ֑ר שֶׁ֠מֶן מִשְׁחַת־קֹ֨דֶשׁ יִֽהְיֶ֥ה זֶ֛ה לִ֖י לְדֹרֹֽתֵיכֶֽם:
for your generations: From here our Rabbis deduced that it [the anointing oil made by Moses] will all remain in existence in the future. -[from Horioth 11b] לדרתיכם: מכאן למדו רבותינו לומר שכולו קיים לעתיד לבא:
This: Heb. זֶה. In gematria, this equals twelve logs. [ ז, ה, totaling 12.] -[from Horioth 11b] זה: בגימטריה תריסר לוגין הוו:
32It shall not be poured upon human flesh, and according to its formula you shall not make anything like it. It is holy; it shall be holy to you. לבעַל־בְּשַׂ֤ר אָדָם֙ לֹ֣א יִיסָ֔ךְ וּבְמַ֨תְכֻּנְתּ֔וֹ לֹ֥א תַֽעֲשׂ֖וּ כָּמֹ֑הוּ קֹ֣דֶשׁ ה֔וּא קֹ֖דֶשׁ יִֽהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶֽם:
It shall not be poured: Heb. לֹא יִיסָ. [This is spelled] with two “yud” s. It is an expression [in the form] of לֹא יִפְעַל, it shall not do, like, “and in order that it be good (יִיטַב) for you” (Deut. 5:16). לא ייסך: בשני יודי"ן, לשון לא יפעל, כמו (דברים ה טו) למען ייטב לך:
It shall not be poured upon human flesh: from this very oil. על בשר אדם לא ייסך: מן השמן הזה עצמו:
and according to its formula you shall not make anything like it: With the amount of its ingredients you shall not make another like it, but if one decreased or increased the ingredients according to the measure of a hin of oil, it is permitted. Also, the [oil] made according to the formula of this [oil]-the one who anoints himself [with it] is not liable, only the one who mixes it. -[from Ker. 5a] ובמתכנתו לא תעשו כמהו: בסכום סמניו לא תעשו אחר כמוהו במשקל סמנין הללו לפי מדת הין שמן, אבל אם פחת או רבה סממנין לפי מדת הין שמן מותר, ואף העשוי במתכונתו של זה, אין הסך ממנו חייב אלא הרוקחו:
according to its formula: Heb. וּבְמַתְכֻּנְךְתּוֹ, a word meaning a number, like “the number of (מַתְכֹּנֶת) bricks” (Exod. 5:8), and so, בְּמַתְכֻּנְךְתָּה, mentioned in reference to the incense (below, verse 37). ובמתכנתו: לשון חשבון, כמו (שמות ה ח) מתכנת הלבנים, וכן במתכונתה של קטורת:
33Any person who compounds anything like it or puts any of it on an alien shall be cut off from his people.' " לגאִ֚ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִרְקַ֣ח כָּמֹ֔הוּ וַֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר יִתֵּ֛ן מִמֶּ֖נּוּ עַל־זָ֑ר וְנִכְרַ֖ת מֵֽעַמָּֽיו:
or puts any of it: Of that [oil] of [i.e., made by] Moses. [However, anyone who anoints himself with oil that was made copying the original anointing oil is not liable.] -[from Ker. 5a] ואשר יתן ממנו: מאותו של משה:
on an alien: [I.e.,] which is not needed for the kehunah or the kingship. על זר: שאינו צורך כהונה ומלכות:
34And the Lord said to Moses: "Take for yourself aromatics, [namely] balsam sap, onycha and galbanum, aromatics and pure frankincense; they shall be of equal weight. לדוַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֶל־משֶׁ֜ה קַח־לְךָ֣ סַמִּ֗ים נָטָ֤ף | וּשְׁחֵ֨לֶת֙ וְחֶלְבְּנָ֔ה סַמִּ֖ים וּלְבֹנָ֣ה זַכָּ֑ה בַּ֥ד בְּבַ֖ד יִֽהְיֶֽה:
balsam sap: Heb. נָטָף. This is balm (צֳרִי), but since it is only the sap that drips (נוֹטֵף) from the balsam trees, it is called נָטָף (Ker. 6a), and in French, gomme, gum resin. The balm itself, however, is called triaca [in Old Provencal], theriac. נטף: הוא צרי, ועל שאינו אלא שרף הנוטף מעצי הקטף קרוי נטף ובלעז גומ"א, והצרי קורין לו תירייק"א ושחלת - שורש בשם חלק ומצהיר כצפורן, ובלשון המשנה קרוי צפורן, וזהו שתרגם אונקלוס וטופרא:
onycha: Heb. וּשְׁחֵלֶת, a root of a spice, smooth and shiny as fingernails, and in the language of the Mishnah (Ker. 6a) it is called צִפֹּרֶן. This is what Onkelos renders as וְטוּפְרָא. [Both צִפֹּרֶן and טוּפְרָא mean “fingernail.”] וחלבנה: בשם שריחו רע וקורין לו גלבנא, ומנאה הכתוב בין סמני הקטורת, ללמדנו, שלא יקל בעינינו לצרף עמנו באגודת תעניותינו ותפלותינו את פושעי ישראל שיהיו נמנין עמנו:
and galbanum: A spice with a vile odor, called galbane [in Old French], galbanum. The Scripture counted it among the ingredients of the incense [in order] to teach us that we should not look askance at including Jewish transgressors with us when we assemble for fasting or prayer. [The Torah instructs us] that they should be counted with us. -[from Ker. 6b] סמים: אחרים:
aromatics: Heb. סַמִּים. Other [aromatics]. -[from Ker. 6b] ולבנה זכה: מכאן למדו רבותינו אחד עשר סמנין נאמרו לו למשה בסיני מיעוט סמים שנים, נטף ושחלת וחלבנה שלשה, הרי חמישה, סמים, לרבות עוד כמו אלו, הרי עשרה, ולבונה הרי אחד עשר ואלו הן הצרי והצפורן, החלבנה והלבונה, מור וקציעה, שבולת נרד וכרכם, הרי שמונה, שהשבולת ונרד אחד, שהנרד דומה לשבולת, הקושט והקילופה והקנמון הרי אחד עשר. בורית כרשינה אינו נקטר אלא בו שפין את הצפורן ללבנה שתהא נאה:
and pure frankincense: From here our Rabbis learned that eleven ingredients were told to Moses [when he was] at Sinai: the minimum of aromatics-two [since סַמִּים is written in the plural form]; balsam sap, onycha, and galbanum-three, equaling five; aromatics [written a second time]-to include again the number of these, equaling ten; and frankincense, totaling eleven. They are as follows: (1) balsam sap, (2) onycha, (3) galbanum, (4) frankincense, (5) myrrh, (6) cassia, (7) spikenard נֵרְדְּ) (שִׁבֹּלֶת, and (8) saffron, totaling eight, because שִׁבֹּלֶת and נֵרְדְּ are one, for spikenard נֵרְדְּ is like an ear [of grain] שִׁבֹּלֶת. [To continue:] (9) costus, (10) aromatic bark, and (11) cinnamon, thus totaling eleven. Borith carshina [mentioned further in the Baraitha, is not counted because it] does not go up in smoke, but they rub the onycha with it to whiten it so that it should be beautiful. -[from Ker. 6a] בד בבד יהיה: אלו הארבעה הנזכרים כאן יהיו שוין משקל במשקל, כמשקלו של זה כך משקלו של זה, וכן שנינו (כריתות ו א) הצרי והצפורן, החלבנה והלבונה משקל שבעים שבעים מנה. ולשון בד נראה בעיני שהוא לשון יחיד, אחד באחד, יהיה זה כמו זה:
they shall be of equal weight: Heb. יִהְיֶה בַּד בְּבַד. These four [ingredients] mentioned here [explicitly] shall be equal, a weight for a weight. Like the weight of one, so shall be the weight of the other. So we learned (Ker. 6a): The balsam, the onycha, the galbanum, and the frankincense the weight of each was seventy manehs. The word בַּד appears to me to mean a unit; each one [i. e., the weight] shall be this one like that one. :
35And you shall make it into incense, a compound according to the art of the perfumer, well blended, pure, holy. להוְעָשִׂ֤יתָ אֹתָהּ֙ קְטֹ֔רֶת רֹ֖קַח מַֽעֲשֵׂ֣ה רוֹקֵ֑חַ מְמֻלָּ֖ח טָה֥וֹר קֹֽדֶשׁ:
well blended: Heb. מְמֻלָח, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: מְעָרֵב, mixed. He should mix their [the spices’] powder thoroughly, one with the other. Accordingly, I say that [the following] are similar to this: “And the sailors (הַמַּלָּחִים) were frightened” (Jonah 1:5); “your sailors (מַלָחַיִ) and your mariners” (Ezek. 27:27). [Sailors are given this appellation] because they turn over the water with oars when they propel the ship, like a person who turns over beaten eggs with a spoon to blend them with water. And anything that a person wishes to blend thoroughly, he turns over with his finger or with a spoon. ממלח: כתרגומו מעורב, שיערב שחיקתן יפה יפה זה עם זה. ואומר אני שדומה לו (יונה א ה) וייראו המלחים, (יחזקאל כז כז) מלחיך וחובליך, על שם שמהפכין את המים במשוטות, כשמנהיגים את הספינה, כאדם המהפך בכף ביצים טרופות לערבן עם המים, וכל דבר שהאדם רוצה לערב יפה יפה, מהפכו באצבע או בבזך:
well blended, pure, holy: It shall be well blended; it shall be pure, and it shall be holy. ממלח טהור קדש: ממולח יהיה וטהור יהיה וקדש יהיה:
36And you shall crush some of it very finely, and you shall set some of it before the testimony in the Tent of Meeting, where I will arrange meetings with you; it shall be to you a holy of holies. לווְשָֽׁחַקְתָּ֣ מִמֶּ֘נָּה֘ הָדֵק֒ וְנָֽתַתָּ֨ה מִמֶּ֜נָּה לִפְנֵ֤י הָֽעֵדֻת֙ בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד אֲשֶׁ֛ר אִוָּעֵ֥ד לְךָ֖ שָׁ֑מָּה קֹ֥דֶשׁ קָֽדָשִׁ֖ים תִּֽהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶֽם:
and you shall set some of it: This is the daily incense, which is on the inner altar, which is in the Tent of Meeting. ונתתה ממנה וגו': היא קטרת שבכל יום ויום שעל מזבח הפנימי, שהוא באהל מועד:
where I will arrange meetings with you: All appointments to speak that I will set up for you, I will set up for that place. אשר אועד לך שמה: כל מועדי דבור שאקבע לך, אני קובעם לאותו מקום:
37And the incense that you make, you shall not make for yourselves according to its formula; it shall be holy to you for the Lord. לזוְהַקְּטֹ֨רֶת֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֔ה בְּמַ֨תְכֻּנְתָּ֔הּ לֹ֥א תַֽעֲשׂ֖וּ לָכֶ֑ם קֹ֛דֶשׁ תִּֽהְיֶ֥ה לְךָ֖ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
according to its formula: According to the number of its ingredients. במתכנתה: במנין סממניה:
it shall be holy to you for the Lord: That you shall not make it except for My Name. קדש תהיה לך לה': שלא תעשנה אלא לשמי:
38Any person who makes anything like it, to smell it[s fragrance], shall be cut off from his people. לחאִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה כָמ֖וֹהָ לְהָרִ֣יחַ בָּ֑הּ וְנִכְרַ֖ת מֵֽעַמָּֽיו:
to smell it[s fragrance]: But you may make it according to its formula of your own [ingredients] in order to deliver it to the community. -[from Ker. 5a] להריח בה: אבל עושה אתה במתכונתה משלך כדי למוסרה לצבור:
Exodus Chapter 31
1The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: אוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
2"See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, ברְאֵ֖ה קָרָ֣אתִי בְשֵׁ֑ם בְּצַלְאֵ֛ל בֶּן־אוּרִ֥י בֶן־ח֖וּר לְמַטֵּ֥ה יְהוּדָֽה:
I have called by name: to perform My work Bezalel. קראתי בשם: לעשות מלאכתי, את בצלאל:
3and I have imbued him with the spirit of God, with wisdom, with insight, with knowledge, and with [talent for] all manner of craftsmanship גוָֽאֲמַלֵּ֥א אֹת֖וֹ ר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֑ים בְּחָכְמָ֛ה וּבִתְבוּנָ֥ה וּבְדַ֖עַת וּבְכָל־מְלָאכָֽה:
with wisdom: [I.e.,] what a person hears from others and learns. -[from Sifrei Deut. 1:13] בחכמה: מה שאדם שומע מאחרים ולמד:
with insight: With his intellect he understands other things based on what he learned. -[from Sifrei Deut. 1:13] ובתבונה: מבין דבר מלבו, מתוך דברים שלמד:
with knowledge: The holy spirit. ובדעת: רוח הקדש:
4to do master weaving, to work with gold, with silver, and with copper, דלַחְשֹׁ֖ב מַֽחֲשָׁבֹ֑ת לַֽעֲשׂ֛וֹת בַּזָּהָ֥ב וּבַכֶּ֖סֶף וּבַנְּחֽשֶׁת:
to do master weaving: Heb. לַחְשֹׁב מַחִשָׁבֹת, the weaving work of a master weaver. לחשוב מחשבת: אריגת מעשה חושב:
5with the craft of stones for setting and with the craft of wood, to do every [manner of] work. הוּבַֽחֲר֥שֶׁת אֶ֛בֶן לְמַלֹּ֖את וּבַֽחֲר֣שֶׁת עֵ֑ץ לַֽעֲשׂ֖וֹת בְּכָל־מְלָאכָֽה:
with the craft: Heb. וּבַחִרשֶׁת, a term denoting a craft, like “a skilled craftsman (חָרָשׁ) ” (Isa. 40:20). Onkelos, however, explained [this term] but varied [the wording] in their explanation [i.e., in the explanation of the two mentions of חִרשֶׁ. וּבַחִרשֶׁתאֶבֶן he rendered וּבְאוּמָנוּתאִבַן טָבָא, and בַחִרשֶׁתעֵץ he rendered וּבְנַגָּרוּתאָעָא, because a craftsman of stones is called אוּמָן, craftsman, whereas a craftsman of wood is called נַגַָָּר, carpenter. ובחרשת: לשון אומנות, כמו (ישעיה מ כ) חרש חכם, ואונקלוס פירש ושנה בפירושן, שחרש אבנים קרוי אומן, וחרש עץ קרוי נגר:
for setting: Heb. לְמַלֹאת, lit., to fill. To set it [each stone] into its setting in its fullness, [i.e.,] to make the setting equal to the measurement of the bottom of the stone and its thickness. [See commentary on Exod. 25:7.] למלאת: להושיבה במשבצת שלה במלואה, לעשות המשבצת למדת מושב האבן ועוביה:
6And, behold, with him I have placed Oholiab the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, and all the wise hearted into whose hearts I have instilled wisdom, and they shall make everything I have commanded you: ווַֽאֲנִ֞י הִנֵּ֧ה נָתַ֣תִּי אִתּ֗וֹ אֵ֣ת אָֽהֳלִיאָ֞ב בֶּן־אֲחִֽיסָמָךְ֙ לְמַטֵּה־דָ֔ן וּבְלֵ֥ב כָּל־חֲכַם־לֵ֖ב נָתַ֣תִּי חָכְמָ֑ה וְעָשׂ֕וּ אֵ֖ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוִּיתִֽךָ:
and all the wise-hearted into whose hearts I have instilled wisdom:And additionally, other wise-hearted people among you [shall assist], as well as everyone into whom I have instilled wisdom, and [all of them] shall make everything I have commanded you. ובלב כל חכם לב וגו': ועוד שאר חכמי לב יש בכם, וכל אשר נתתי בו חכמה ועשו את כל אשר צויתיך:
7The Tent of Meeting and the ark for the testimony, as well as the cover that [shall be] upon it, all the implements of the tent, זאֵ֣ת | אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֗ד וְאֶת־הָֽאָרֹן֙ לָֽעֵדֻ֔ת וְאֶת־הַכַּפֹּ֖רֶת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָלָ֑יו וְאֵ֖ת כָּל־כְּלֵ֥י הָאֹֽהֶל:
and the ark for the testimony: For the purpose of the tablets of the testimony. ואת הארן לעדת: לצורך לוחות העדות:
8the table and its implements, the pure menorah and all its implements, the altar of incense, חוְאֶת־הַשֻּׁלְחָן֙ וְאֶת־כֵּלָ֔יו וְאֶת־הַמְּנֹרָ֥ה הַטְּהֹרָ֖ה וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלֶ֑יהָ וְאֵ֖ת מִזְבַּ֥ח הַקְּטֹֽרֶת:
the pure: Heb. הַטְּהֹרָה. [The menorah is described by this adjective] because [it was made] of pure gold. [based on Exod. 25:31] הטהרה: על שם זהב טהור:
9the altar for the burnt offering and all its implements, the washstand and its base, טוְאֶת־מִזְבַּ֥ח הָֽעֹלָ֖ה וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֑יו וְאֶת־הַכִּיּ֖וֹר וְאֶת־כַּנּֽוֹ:
10the meshwork garments, the holy garments for Aaron the kohen, the garments of his sons [in which] to serve [as kohanim], יוְאֵ֖ת בִּגְדֵ֣י הַשְּׂרָ֑ד וְאֶת־בִּגְדֵ֤י הַקֹּ֨דֶשׁ֙ לְאַֽהֲרֹ֣ן הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְאֶת־בִּגְדֵ֥י בָנָ֖יו לְכַהֵֽן:
the meshwork garments: Heb. בִּגְדֵי הַשְְׂרָד In my opinion, according to the simple meaning of the verse, it is impossible to say that the garments of the kehunah are referred to [here], because it says next to them [at the end of the verse], “the holy garments for Aaron the kohen, the garments of his sons [in which] to serve [as kohanim].” But these בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד [referred to here] are the garments of blue, purple, and crimson wool mentioned in the section dealing with the travels (Num. 4:6-13): “and they shall place upon it a garment of blue wool,” “and they shall place upon it a garment of purple wool,” “and they shall place upon them a garment of crimson wool.” My assertion [that בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד refers to the coverings of the vessels] appears correct, since it says: “And from the blue wool, the purple wool, and the crimson they made בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד ” (Exod. 39:1), but linen was not mentioned with them. Now, if it [the text] is speaking of the garments of the kehunah, we do not find in any of them [reference to] purple or crimson wool without [the addition of] linen. בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד Some [commentators] explain בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד as an expression of work and service, like its [Aramaic] translation, לְבוּשֵׁי שִׁמוּשָׁא, and it has no similarity in the Scriptures. But I believe that it is Aramaic, like the [Aramaic] translation of קְלָעִים [hangings, translated סְרָדִין] (Exod. 27:9) and the [Aramaic] translation of מִכְבָּר [grating, translated סְרָדָא] (Exod. 27:4), for they were woven with a needle [and] made of many holes, lazediz in Old French, mesh-work, crochet-work, [or] lace. ואת בגדי השרד: אומר אני לפי פשוטו של מקרא אי אפשר לומר שבבגדי כהונה מדבר, לפי שנאמר אצלם ואת בגדי הקדש לאהרן הכהן ואת בגדי בניו לכהן, אלא אלו בגדי השרד, הם בגדי התכלת והארגמן ותולעת שני, האמורין בפרשת מסעות (במדבר ד יב) ונתנו אל בגד תכלת, (שם יג) ופרשו עליו בגד ארגמן, (שם ח) ופרשו עליהם בגד תולעת שני. ונראין דברי, שנאמר (שמות לט א) ומן התכלת והארגמן ותולעת השני עשו בגדי שרד לשרת בקדש, ולא הוזכר שש עמהם, ואם בבגדי כהונה מדבר, לא מצינו באחד מהם ארגמן או תולעת שני בלא שש:
11the anointing oil and the incense for the Holy; in complete accordance with everything I have commanded you they shall do." יאוְאֵ֨ת שֶׁ֧מֶן הַמִּשְׁחָ֛ה וְאֶת־קְטֹ֥רֶת הַסַּמִּ֖ים לַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ כְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־צִוִּיתִ֖ךָ יַֽעֲשֽׂוּ:
and the incense for the Holy: For the purpose of bringing [incense] up in smoke in the Heichal, which is holy. ואת קטרת הסמים לקדש: לצורך הקטרת ההיכל שהוא קדש:
12The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: יבוַיֹּ֥אמֶר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
13"And you, speak to the children of Israel and say: 'Only keep My Sabbaths! For it is a sign between Me and you for your generations, to know that I, the Lord, make you holy. יגוְאַתָּ֞ה דַּבֵּ֨ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר אַ֥ךְ אֶת־שַׁבְּתֹתַ֖י תִּשְׁמֹ֑רוּ כִּי֩ א֨וֹת הִ֜וא בֵּינִ֤י וּבֵֽינֵיכֶם֙ לְדֹרֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם לָדַ֕עַת כִּ֛י אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה מְקַדִּשְׁכֶֽם:
And you, speak to the children of Israel: But [as for] you, although I have mandated you to command them [the Israelites] concerning the work of the Mishkan, do not let it seem to you that you may easily set aside the Sabbath because of that work. ואתה דבר אל בני ישראל: ואתה, אף על פי שהפקדתיך לצוותם על מלאכת המשכן, אל יקל בעיניך לדחות את השבת מפני אותה מלאכה:
Only keep My Sabbaths!: Although you will be rushed to perform the work [of the Mishkan] quickly, the Sabbath shall not be set aside because of it. All instances of אַ and רַק [imply limitations, i.e.,] are exclusive, to exclude the Sabbath from the work of the Mishkan. אך את שבתתי תשמרו: אף על פי שתהיו רדופין וזריזין בזריזות מלאכה שבת אל תדחה מפניה. כל אכין ורקין מיעוטין, למעט שבת ממלאכת המשכן:
For it is a sign between Me and you: It is a sign of distinction between us that I have chosen you, by granting you as an inheritance My day of rest for [your] rest. כי אות הוא ביני וביניכם: אות גדולה היא בינינו שבחרתי בכם, בהנחילי לכם את יום מנוחתי למנוחה:
to know: [So that] the nations [should know] that I, the Lord, sanctify you. לדעת: האומות [בה] כי אני ה' מקדשכם:
14Therefore, keep the Sabbath, for it is a sacred thing for you. Those who desecrate it shall be put to death, for whoever performs work on it, that soul will be cut off from the midst of its people. ידוּשְׁמַרְתֶּם֙ אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּ֔ת כִּ֛י קֹ֥דֶשׁ הִ֖וא לָכֶ֑ם מְחַֽלֲלֶ֨יהָ֙ מ֣וֹת יוּמָ֔ת כִּ֗י כָּל־הָֽעֹשֶׂ֥ה בָהּ֙ מְלָאכָ֔ה וְנִכְרְתָ֛ה הַנֶּ֥פֶשׁ הַהִ֖וא מִקֶּ֥רֶב עַמֶּֽיהָ:
shall be put to death: If there are witnesses and a warning. מות יומת: אם יש עדים והתראה:
will be cut off: without warning. -[from Mechilta] ונכרתה: בלא התראה:
Those who desecrate it: Heb. מְחַלְלֶיהָ, [those] who treat its sanctity as profane. מחלליה: הנוהג בה חול בקדושתה:
15Six days work may be done, but on the seventh day is a Sabbath of complete rest, holy to the Lord; whoever performs work on the Sabbath day shall be put to death.' טושֵׁ֣שֶׁת יָמִים֘ יֵֽעָשֶׂ֣ה מְלָאכָה֒ וּבַיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֗י שַׁבַּ֧ת שַׁבָּת֛וֹן קֹ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה כָּל־הָֽעֹשֶׂ֧ה מְלָאכָ֛ה בְּי֥וֹם הַשַּׁבָּ֖ת מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת:
a Sabbath of complete rest: Heb. שַׁבָּתשַׁבָּתוֹן, a reposeful rest, not a casual rest. שבת שבתון: מנוחת מרגוע ולא מנוחת עראי:
(a Sabbath of complete rest: For this reason, Scripture repeated it [the word, שַׁבָּת], to inform [us] that on it all work is prohibited, even what is needed for food. Similarly regarding Yom Kippur, in whose context it says: “It is a Sabbath of complete rest for you” (Lev. 23:32), all work is prohibited. However, concerning festivals it says only: “on the first day is a rest, and on the eighth day is a rest” (Lev. 23:39), [meaning that] on them [i.e., on holidays] only servile work is prohibited, but work needed for food [preparation] is permitted.) שבת שבתון: לכך כפלו הכתוב לומר שאסור בכל מלאכה, אפילו אוכל נפש, וכן יום הכפורים שנאמר בו (ויקרא כג לב) שבת שבתון הוא לכם, אסור בכל מלאכה, אבל יום טוב לא נאמר בו כי אם ביום הראשון שבתון וביום השמיני שבתון (שם) אסורים בכל מלאכת עבודה, ומותרים במלאכת אוכל נפש:
holy to the Lord: The observance of its sanctity shall be for My name and by My commandment. קדש לה': שמירת קדושתה לשמי ובמצוותי:
16Thus shall the children of Israel observe the Sabbath, to make the Sabbath throughout their generations as an everlasting covenant. טזוְשָֽׁמְר֥וּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּ֑ת לַֽעֲשׂ֧וֹת אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּ֛ת לְדֹֽרֹתָ֖ם בְּרִ֥ית עוֹלָֽם:
17Between Me and the children of Israel, it is forever a sign that [in] six days The Lord created the heaven and the earth, and on the seventh day He ceased and rested." יזבֵּינִ֗י וּבֵין֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל א֥וֹת הִ֖וא לְעֹלָ֑ם כִּי־שֵׁ֣שֶׁת יָמִ֗ים עָשָׂ֤ה יְהֹוָה֙ אֶת־הַשָּׁמַ֣יִם וְאֶת־הָאָ֔רֶץ וּבַיּוֹם֙ הַשְּׁבִיעִ֔י שָׁבַ֖ת וַיִּנָּפַֽשׁ:
and rested: Heb. וַיִּנָפַשׁ. As the Targum [Onkelos] renders: וְנָח, and rested. Now every expression of נוֹפֶשׁ, rest, is an expression of נֶפֶשׁ, soul, for one regains one’s soul and one’s breath when one rests from the toil of work. He about Whom it is written: “He neither tires nor wearies” (Isa. 40:28), and Whose every act is performed by speech [alone, without physical effort], dictated rest in reference to Himself [only] in order to make it understood to the [human] ear with words that it can understand. וינפש: כתרגומו ונח, וכל לשון נופש והוא לשון נפש, שמשיב נפשו ונשימתו בהרגיעו מטורח מהמלאכה. ומי שכתוב בו (ישעיה מ כח) לא ייעף ולא יגע, וכל פעלו במאמר, הכתיב מנוחה לעצמו, לשבר האוזן מה שהיא יכולה לשמוע:
I shall be sanctified amidst the children of Israel.[Leviticus 22:32]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Ki Tisa, 1st Portion Exodus 30:11-31:17 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 30
11The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: יאוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
12"When you take the sum of the children of Israel according to their numbers, let each one give to the Lord an atonement for his soul when they are counted; then there will be no plague among them when they are counted. יבכִּ֣י תִשָּׂ֞א אֶת־רֹ֥אשׁ בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֘ לִפְקֻֽדֵיהֶם֒ וְנָ֨תְנ֜וּ אִ֣ישׁ כֹּ֧פֶר נַפְשׁ֛וֹ לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה בִּפְקֹ֣ד אֹתָ֑ם וְלֹא־יִֽהְיֶ֥ה בָהֶ֛ם נֶ֖גֶף בִּפְקֹ֥ד אֹתָֽם:
When you take: Heb. כִּי תִשָׂא. [This is] an expression of taking, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders. [I.e.,] when you wish to take the sum [total] of their numbers to know how many they are, do not count them by the head, but each one shall give a half-shekel, and you shall count the shekels. [Thereby] you will know their number. כי תשא: לשון קבלה, כתרגומו, כשתחפוץ לקבל סכום מנינם לדעת כמה הם, אל תמנם לגלגולת, אלא יתנו כל אחד מחצית השקל ותמנה את השקלים ותדע מנינם:
then there will be no plague among them: for the evil eye has power over numbered things, and pestilence comes upon them, as we find in David’s time (II Sam. 24). ולא יהיה בהם נגף: שהמנין שולט בו עין הרע והדבר בא עליהם, כמו שמצינו בימי דוד:
13This they shall give, everyone who goes through the counting: half a shekel according to the holy shekel. Twenty gerahs equal one shekel; half of [such] a shekel shall be an offering to the Lord. יגזֶ֣ה | יִתְּנ֗וּ כָּל־הָֽעֹבֵר֙ עַל־הַפְּקֻדִ֔ים מַֽחֲצִ֥ית הַשֶּׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ עֶשְׂרִ֤ים גֵּרָה֙ הַשֶּׁ֔קֶל מַֽחֲצִ֣ית הַשֶּׁ֔קֶל תְּרוּמָ֖ה לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
This they shall give: He [God] showed him [Moses] a sort of coin of fire weighing half a shekel, and He said to him, “Like this one they shall give.” -[from Tanchuma 9; Tanchuma Buber, Naso p. 35; Pesikta d’Rav Kahana 19a; Midrash Psalms 91:1; Yerushalmi, Shekalim 1:4] זה יתנו: הראה לו כמין מטבע של אש, ומשקלה מחצית השקל, ואומר לו כזה יתנו:
who goes through the counting: Heb. הָעֹבֵר עַל-הַפְקֻדִים. It is customary for those who count to pass the ones who have been counted one following another, and so [too the word יַעִבֹר in] “each one that passes under the rod” (Lev. 27:32), and so [the word ךְתַּעִבֹרְנָה in] “flocks will again pass under the hands of one who counts them” (Jer. 33:13). העבר על הפקודים: דרך המונין מעבירין את הנמנין זה אחר זה, וכן לשון (ויקרא כז לב) כל אשר יעבור תחת השבט, וכן (ירמיה לג יג) תעבורנה הצאן על ידי מונה:
half a shekel according to the holy shekel: By the weight of the shekel that I fixed for you [against which] to weigh the holy shekels, such as the shekels mentioned in the section dealing with personal evaluations (Lev. 27:1-8) and [in the section concerning] inherited fields (Lev. 27:16-21). מחצית השקל בשקל הקודש: במשקל השקל שקצבתי לך לשקול בו שקלי הקדש, כגון שקלים האמורין בפרשת ערכין ושדה אחוזה:
Twenty gerahs equal one shekel: Now He explains to you how much it is. עשרים גרה השקל: עכשיו פירש לך כמה הוא:
gerahs: Heb. גֵרָה, a word meaning a ma’ah [a small coin]. Likewise, “will come to prostrate himself before him for a silver piece (אִגוֹרַתכֶּסֶף) and a morsel of bread” (I Sam. 2:36). גרה: לשון מעה, וכן בשמואל (בשמואל א' ב לו) יבוא להשתחות לו לאגורת כסף וככר לחם:
Twenty gerahs equal one shekel: for a whole shekel equals four zuzim, and the zuz was originally five ma’oth, but they came and added a sixth to it and raised it to six ma’oth of silver, and half of this shekel [of] which I have spoken to you [here in this verse], they shall give as an offering to the Lord. עשרים גרה השקל: השקל השלם, שהשקל ארבעה זוזים, והזוז מתחלתו חמש מעות, אלא באו והוסיפו עליו שתות והעלוהו לשש מעה כסף, ומחצית השקל הזה, שאמרתי לך, יתנו תרומה לה':
14Everyone who goes through the counting, from the age of twenty and upward, shall give an offering to the Lord. ידכֹּ֗ל הָֽעֹבֵר֙ עַל־הַפְּקֻדִ֔ים מִבֶּ֛ן עֶשְׂרִ֥ים שָׁנָ֖ה וָמָ֑עְלָה יִתֵּ֖ן תְּרוּמַ֥ת יְהֹוָֽה:
from the age of twenty and upward: [The Torah] teaches you here that no one under twenty years old goes out [to serve] in the army or is counted among men. מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה: למדך כאן, שאין פחות מבן עשרים יוצא לצבא ונמנה בכלל אנשים:
15The rich shall give no more, and the poor shall give no less than half a shekel, with which to give the offering to the Lord, to atone for your souls. טוהֶֽעָשִׁ֣יר לֹֽא־יַרְבֶּ֗ה וְהַדַּל֙ לֹ֣א יַמְעִ֔יט מִמַּֽחֲצִ֖ית הַשָּׁ֑קֶל לָתֵת֙ אֶת־תְּרוּמַ֣ת יְהֹוָ֔ה לְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶֽם:
to atone for your souls: That they should not be struck by a plague because of the counting. Another explanation: לכפר על נפשתיכם: שלא תנגפו על ידי המנין. דבר אחר לכפר על נפשותיכם, לפי שרמז להם כאן שלש תרומות, שנכתב כאן תרומת ה' שלוש פעמים אחת תרומת א-דנים, שמנאן כשהתחילו בנדבת המשכן ונתנו כל אחד ואחד מחצית השקל, ועלה למאת ככר, שנאמר (שמות לח כה) וכסף פקודי העדה מאת ככר, ומהם נעשו הא-דנים, שנאמר (שמות לח כז) ויהי מאת ככר הכסף וגו'. והשנית אף היא על ידי מנין שמנאן, משהוקם המשכן, הוא המנין האמור בתחלת חומש הפקודים (במדבר א א) באחד לחדש השני בשנה השנית, ונתנו כל אחד מחצית השקל, והן לקנות מהן קרבנות צבור של כל שנה ושנה, והושוו בהם עניים ועשירים, ועל אותה תרומה נאמר לכפר על נפשותיכם, שהקרבנות לכפרה הם באים. והשלישית היא תרומת המשכן, כמו שנאמר (שמות לה כד) כל מרים תרומת כסף ונחשת, ולא היתה יד כולם שוה בה, אלא איש איש מה שנדבו לבו:
to atone for your souls: [This was written] because [God] hinted to them [the Israelites] here [about] three offerings, because “an offering to the Lord” is written here three times. The first [represents] the offering [of silver] for the sockets [of the Mishkan], for he [Moses] counted them when they commenced with the donations for the Mishkan. Everyone gave a half-shekel, amounting to one hundred talents, as it is said: “And the silver of the community census was one hundred talents” (Exod. 38:25). The sockets were made from this, as it is said: “One hundred talents of the silver was [used to cast the sockets of the Mishkan and the sockets of the dividing curtain]” (Exod. 38:27). The second [offering mentioned here] was also [collected] through counting, for he [Moses] counted them after the Mishkan was erected. This is the counting mentioned in the beginning of the Book of Numbers: “on the first of the second month in the second year” (Num. 1:1). [For this offering] everyone gave a half-shekel, [the total of] which was [earmarked] for the purchase of communal sacrifices for every year. The rich and poor were equal in them [i.e., they gave equally in these two offerings]. Concerning that [second] offering, it is said: “to atone for your souls,” because the sacrifices are brought for the purpose of atonement. The third one [offering] is the offering for the Mishkan, as it is said: “Whoever set aside an offering of silver or copper” (Exod. 35:24). In this [offering] not everyone gave the same amount, but each one [gave] according to what his heart inspired him to give. -[from Shekalim 2b] :
16You shall take the silver of the atonements from the children of Israel and use it for the work of the Tent of Meeting; it shall be a remembrance for the children of Israel before the Lord, to atone for your souls." טזוְלָֽקַחְתָּ֞ אֶת־כֶּ֣סֶף הַכִּפֻּרִ֗ים מֵאֵת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְנָֽתַתָּ֣ אֹת֔וֹ עַל־עֲבֹדַ֖ת אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד וְהָיָה֩ לִבְנֵ֨י יִשְׂרָאֵ֤ל לְזִכָּרוֹן֙ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה לְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶֽם:
and use it for the work of the Tent of Meeting: [From this] you learn that they were commanded to count them at the beginning of the donation for the Mishkan after the incident of the calf. [They were commanded then] because a plague had befallen them, as it is said: “And the Lord plagued the people” (Exod. 32:35). This can be compared to a flock of sheep, treasured by its owner, which was stricken with pestilence. When it [the pestilence] was over, he [the owner] said to the shepherd, “Please count my sheep to know how many are left,” in order to make it known that he treasured it [the flock] (Tanchuma, Ki Thissa 9). It is, however, impossible to say that this counting [mentioned here] was the [same] one mentioned in the Book of Numbers, for in that one [counting] it says: “on the first of the second month” (Num. 1:1), and the Mishkan was erected on the first [day] of the first month, as it is said: On the day of the first month, on the first of the month, you shall erect, etc. (Exod. 40:2). The sockets were made from shekels realized from that counting, as it is said: “One hundred talents of the silver were used to cast, etc.” (Exod. 38:27). Thus you learn that they [the countings] were two-one at the beginning of their donation [to the Mishkan] after Yom Kippur in the first year [after the Exodus], and one in the second year in Iyar after the Mishkan had been erected. Now if you ask, how is it possible that in both of these countings the Israelites equaled six hundred three thousand, five hundred fifty? In the case of the silver of the community census, it says this number, and also in the Book of Numbers it says the same: “And all the counted ones were six hundred three thousand, five hundred fifty” (Num. 1:46). Were they [the countings] not in two [separate] years? It is impossible that in the first census there were none who were nineteen years old and consequently not counted, and by the second counting became twenty years old [and were counted]. The answer to this matter is that in the context of the ages of people, they were counted in the same year, but in the context of the Exodus they [the two dates] were two [separate] years, since [to figure the time] from the Exodus, we count from [the month of] Nissan, as we learned in [tractate] Rosh Hashanah (2b). In this context, the Mishkan was built in the first year [after the Exodus] and erected in the second year, for the new year started on the first of Nissan. People’s ages, however, are counted according to the number of years of the world, beginning with [the month of] Tishri. Thus, the two countings were [taken] in the same year. The first counting was in Tishri after Yom Kippur, when the Omnipresent was placated toward Israel to forgive them, and they were commanded concerning [building] the Mishkan. The second one [counting] was on the first of Iyar. -[from Num. Rabbah 1:10] ונתת אתו על עבודת אהל מועד: למדת שנצטוה למנותם בתחלת נדבת המשכן אחר מעשה העגל, מפני שנכנס בהם מגפה, כמו שנאמר (שמות לב לה) ויגוף ה' את העם. משל לצאן החביבה על בעליה, שנפל בה דבר, ומשפסק אמר לו לרועה בבקשה ממך, מנה את צאני ודע כמה נותרו בהם, להודיע שהיא חביבה עליו. ואי אפשר לומר, שהמנין הזה הוא האמור בחומש הפקודים, שהרי נאמר בו (במדבר א א) באחד לחדש השני, והמשכן הוקם באחד לחודש הראשון, שנאמר (שמות מ ב) ביום החודש הראשון באחד לחודש תקים וגו', ומהמנין הזה נעשו הא-דנים משקלים שלו, שנאמר (שמות לח כז) ויהי מאת ככר הכסף לצקת וגו', הא למדת שתים היו אחת בתחלת נדבתן אחר יום הכפורים בשנה ראשונה, ואחת בשנה שנייה באייר משהוקם המשכן. ואם תאמר, וכי אפשר שבשניהם היו ישראל שוים שש מאות אלף ושלשת אלפים וחמש מאות וחמישים, שהרי בכסף פקודי העדה נאמר כן, ובחומש הפקודים אף בו נאמר כן (במדבר א מו) ויהיו כל הפקודים שש מאות אלף ושלשת אלפים וחמש מאות וחמשים, והלא בשתי שנים היו, ואי אפשר שלא היו בשעת מנין הראשון בני תשע עשרה שנה שלא נמנו ובשנייה נעשו בני עשרים. תשובה לדבר, אצל שנות האנשים בשנה אחת נמנו, אבל למנין יציאת מצרים היו שתי שנים, לפי שליציאת מצרים מונין מניסן, כמו ששנינו במסכת ראש השנה (ב ב), ונבנה המשכן בראשונה והוקם בשנייה שנתחדשה שנה באחד בניסן, אבל שנות האנשים מנוין למנין שנות עולם המתחילין מתשרי, נמצאו שני המנינים בשנה אחת המנין הראשון היה בתשרי לאחר יום הכפורים, שנתרצה המקום לישראל לסלוח להם, ונצטוו על המשכן, והשני באחד באייר:
for the work of the Tent of Meeting: These are the sockets made from it [i.e., from the silver of the atonements]. על עבודת אהל מועד: הן הא-דנים שנעשו בו:
17The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: יזוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
18"You shall make a washstand of copper and its base of copper for washing, and you shall place it between the Tent of Meeting and the altar, and you shall put water therein. יחוְעָשִׂ֜יתָ כִּיּ֥וֹר נְח֛שֶׁת וְכַנּ֥וֹ נְח֖שֶׁת לְרָחְצָ֑ה וְנָֽתַתָּ֣ אֹת֗וֹ בֵּֽין־אֹ֤הֶל מוֹעֵד֙ וּבֵ֣ין הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ וְנָֽתַתָּ֥ שָׁ֖מָּה מָֽיִם:
a washstand: Like a sort of large caldron, which has faucets allowing water to pour out through their openings. כיור: כמין דוד גדולה ולה דדים המריקים בפיהם מים:
and its base: Heb. וְכַנּוֹ, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: וּבְסִיסֵיהּ, a seat prepared for the washstand. וכנו: כתרגומו ובסיסיה, מושב מתוקן לכיור:
for washing: This refers back to the washstand. לרחצה: מוסב על הכיור:
between… the altar: [This refers to] the altar for burnt offerings, about which it is written that it was in front of the entrance of the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting. The washstand was drawn away slightly [from the entrance] and stood opposite the space between the altar and the Mishkan, but it did not intervene at all [between them], because it is said: “And he placed the altar for burnt offerings at the entrance of the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting” (Exod. 40:29), implying that the altar was in front of the Tent of Meeting, but the washstand was not in front of the Tent of Meeting. How is that so? It [the washstand] was drawn away slightly to the south. So it is taught in Zev. (59a). ובין המזבח: מזבח העולה שכתוב בו, שהוא לפני פתח משכן אהל מועד, והיה הכיור משוך קמעא ועומד כנגד אויר שבין המזבח והמשכן, ואינו מפסיק כלל בינתים, משום שנאמר (שמות מ כט) ואת מזבח העולה שם פתח משכן אהל מועד, כלומר מזבח לפני אהל מועד ואין כיור לפני אהל מועד, הא כיצד, משוך קמעא כלפי הדרום, כך שנויה בזבחים (נט א):
19Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and feet from it. יטוְרָֽחֲצ֛וּ אַֽהֲרֹ֥ן וּבָנָ֖יו מִמֶּ֑נּוּ אֶת־יְדֵיהֶ֖ם וְאֶת־רַגְלֵיהֶֽם:
their hands and feet: He [the kohen] would wash his hands and feet simultaneously. So we learned in Zev. (19b): How was the washing of the hands and the feet [performed]? [The kohen] would lay his right hand on his right foot and his left hand on his left foot and wash [in this manner]. את ידיהם ואת רגליהם: בבת אחת היה מקדש ידיו ורגליו, וכך שנינו בזבחים (יט ב) כיצד קדוש ידים ורגלים, מניח ידו הימנית על גבי רגלו הימנית, וידו השמאלית על גבי רגלו השמאלית, ומקדש:
20When they enter the Tent of Meeting, they shall wash with water so that they will not die; or when they approach the altar to serve, to make a fire offering rise up in smoke to the Lord, כבְּבֹאָ֞ם אֶל־אֹ֧הֶל מוֹעֵ֛ד יִרְחֲצוּ־מַ֖יִם וְלֹ֣א יָמֻ֑תוּ א֣וֹ בְגִשְׁתָּ֤ם אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֨חַ֙ לְשָׁרֵ֔ת לְהַקְטִ֥יר אִשֶּׁ֖ה לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
When they enter the Tent of Meeting: to bring the incense up in smoke in the morning and in the afternoon, or to sprinkle some of the blood of the bull of the anointed Kohen [Gadol, who erred in his halachic decision and practiced according to that erroneous decision,] (Lev. 4:3-12) and the blood of the kids for [sin offerings for having engaged in] idolatry (Num. 15:22-26). בבאם אל אהל מועד: להקטיר קטרת שחרית ובין הערבים, או להזות מדם פר כהן המשיח ושעירי עבודה זרה:
so that they will not die: This implies that if they do not wash, they will die. For in the Torah [there] are stated implications, and from the negative implication you [can] understand the positive. ולא ימותו: הא אם לא ירחצו ימותו, שבתורה נאמרו כללות, ומכלל לאו אתה שומע הן:
the altar: [I.e.,] the outer [altar], in which no entry to the Tent of Meeting is involved, only [entry] into the courtyard. אל המזבח: החיצון, שאין כאן ביאת אהל מועד אלא בחצר:
21they shall wash their hands and feet so that they will not die; this shall be for them a perpetual statute, for him and for his descendants, for their generations." כאוְרָֽחֲצ֛וּ יְדֵיהֶ֥ם וְרַגְלֵיהֶ֖ם וְלֹ֣א יָמֻ֑תוּ וְהָֽיְתָ֨ה לָהֶ֧ם חָק־עוֹלָ֛ם ל֥וֹ וּלְזַרְע֖וֹ לְדֹֽרֹתָֽם:
so that they will not die: [This verse is written] to impose death upon one who serves on the altar when his hands and feet are not washed, for from the first death penalty (verse 20) we understand only [that death is imposed] upon one who enters the Temple. ולא ימותו: לחייב מיתה על המשמש במזבח ואינו רחוץ ידים ורגלים, שהמיתה הראשונה לא שמענו אלא על הנכנס להיכל:
22The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: כבוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
23"And you, take for yourself spices of the finest sort: of pure myrrh five hundred [shekel weights]; of fragrant cinnamon half of it two hundred and fifty [shekel weights]; of fragrant cane two hundred and fifty [shekel weights], כגוְאַתָּ֣ה קַח־לְךָ֘ בְּשָׂמִ֣ים רֹאשׁ֒ מָר־דְּרוֹר֙ חֲמֵ֣שׁ מֵא֔וֹת וְקִנְּמָן־בֶּ֥שֶׂם מַֽחֲצִית֖וֹ חֲמִשִּׁ֣ים וּמָאתָ֑יִם וּקְנֵה־בֹ֖שֶׂם חֲמִשִּׁ֥ים וּמָאתָֽיִם:
spices of the finest sort: Heb. בְּשָׂמִים רֹאשׁ, of high quality. בשמים ראש: חשובים:
fragrant cinnamon: Since cinnamon is the bark of a tree, and there is one good type [of cinnamon] that has a fragrant bouquet and a good taste, and there is another that is merely like wood, it was necessary to state “fragrant cinnamon,” [meaning that the incense was to be made] of the good species. וקנמן בשם: לפי שהקנמון קליפת עץ הוא, יש שהוא טוב ויש בו ריח טוב וטעם, ויש שאינו אלא כעץ, לכך הוצרך לומר קנמן בשם, מן הטוב:
half of it two hundred and fifty [shekel weights]: Half of the amount to be brought shall be two hundred and fifty; thus altogether it is five hundred [shekel weights], like the amount of pure myrrh. If so, why was it stated in halves? This is a Scriptural decree to bring it in halves to add to it two overweights, because we do not weigh [the spices] exactly. So it was taught in Kereithoth (5a). מחציתו חמשים ומאתים: מחצית הבאתו תהא חמשים ומאתים, נמצא כולו חמש מאות, כמו שיעור מר דרור, אם כן, למה נאמר בו חצאין, גזירת הכתוב היא להביאו לחצאין, להרבות בו שתי הכרעות, שאין שוקלין עין בעין, וכך שנויה בכריתות (דף ה א):
fragrant cane: Heb. וּקְנֵה-בֹשֶׂם, cane of spice. Since there are canes that are not of spice, it is necessary to specify: בֹשֶׂם וקנה בשם: קנה של בשם לפי שיש קנים שאינן של בשם, הוצרך לומר בשם:
two hundred and fifty [shekel weights]: [This is] its total sum. חמשים ומאתים: סך משקל כולו:
24and of cassia five hundred [shekel weights] according to the holy shekel, and one hin of olive oil. כדוְקִדָּ֕ה חֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵא֖וֹת בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ וְשֶׁ֥מֶן זַ֖יִת הִֽין:
and of cassia: Heb. וְקִדָּה, the name of the root of an herb, and in the language of the Sages: קְצִיעָה, cassia. -[from Ker. 6a] וקדה: שם שורש עשב, ובלשון חכמים קציעה:
hin: [The equivalent of] twelve logs. The Sages of Israel differ concerning it [i.e., how the oil was made]. Rabbi Meir says: They [whoever made the anointing oil] boiled the roots in it [the oil of the anointment]. Rabbi Judah said to him: But is it not so that it [the anointment oil] did not even suffice to anoint the roots [and thus they certainly couldn’t boil the spices in the oil]? Rather, they soaked them [the spices] in water so that they would not absorb the oil, and then poured the oil on them until they were impregnated with the scent, and [then] they wiped the oil off the roots. -[from Ker. 5a] הין: שנים עשר לוגין, ונחלקו בו חכמי ישראל רבי מאיר אומר בו שלקו את העיקרין. אמר לו רבי יהודה והלא לסוך את העיקרין אינו סיפק, אלא שראום במים, שלא יבלעו את השמן, ואחר כך הציף עליהם השמן עד שקלט הריח וקפחו לשמן מעל העיקרין:
25You shall make this into an oil of holy annoinment, a perfumed compound according to the art of a perfumer; it shall be an oil of holy anointment. כהוְעָשִׂ֣יתָ אֹת֗וֹ שֶׁ֚מֶן מִשְׁחַת־קֹ֔דֶשׁ רֹ֥קַח מִרְקַ֖חַת מַֽעֲשֵׂ֣ה רֹקֵ֑חַ שֶׁ֥מֶן מִשְׁחַת־קֹ֖דֶשׁ יִֽהְיֶֽה:
a perfumed compound: Heb. רֹקַח מִרְקַחַת. רֹקַח is a noun, and the accent, which is on the first syllable, proves that. It is like רֶקַע רֶגַע, but it is not like “Who wrinkles (רֹגַע) the sea” (Isa. 51:15), or like “Who spread out (רֹקַע) the earth” (Isa. 42:5) [which are both verbs], because [in those instances] the accent is at the end of the word. Any substance mixed with another substance until one becomes impregnated from the other with either scent or taste is called מִרְקַחַת. רקח מרקחת: רקח שם דבר הוא, והטעם מוכיח שהוא למעלה, והרי הוא כמו רקח, רגע, ואינו כמו (ישעיה נא טו) רגע הים, וכמו (ישעיהו מב ה) רקע הארץ, שהטעם למטה, וכל דבר המעורב בחבירו, עד שזה קופח מזה או ריח או טעם קרוי מרקחת:
a perfumed compound: Heb. רֹקַח מִרְקַחַת, a compound made through the skill of mixing. רקח מרקחת: רקח העשוי על ידי אומנות ותערובות:
according to the art of a perfumer: Heb. רֹקֵחַ, the name of the craftsman in this field. מעשה רוקח: שם האומן בדבר:
26And you shall anoint with it the Tent of Meeting and the Ark of Testimony, כווּמָֽשַׁחְתָּ֥ ב֖וֹ אֶת־אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד וְאֵ֖ת אֲר֥וֹן הָֽעֵדֻֽת:
And you shall anoint with it: All anointments were in the shape of the Greek [letter] “chaff,” except those of the kings, which were like a sort of crown. -[from Ker. 5b] ומשחת בו: כל המשיחות כמין כי יונית, חוץ משל מלכים שהן כמין נזר:
27the table and all its implements, the menorah and its implements, the altar of incense, כזוְאֶת־הַשֻּׁלְחָן֙ וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֔יו וְאֶת־הַמְּנֹרָ֖ה וְאֶת־כֵּלֶ֑יהָ וְאֵ֖ת מִזְבַּ֥ח הַקְּטֹֽרֶת:
28the altar of the burnt offering and all its implements, the washstand and its base. כחוְאֶת־מִזְבַּ֥ח הָֽעֹלָ֖ה וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֑יו וְאֶת־הַכִּיֹּ֖ר וְאֶת־כַּנּֽוֹ:
29And you shall sanctify them so that they become a holy of holies; whatever touches them shall become holy. כטוְקִדַּשְׁתָּ֣ אֹתָ֔ם וְהָי֖וּ קֹ֣דֶשׁ קָֽדָשִׁ֑ים כָּל־הַנֹּגֵ֥עַ בָּהֶ֖ם יִקְדָּֽשׁ:
And you shall sanctify them: This anointment sanctifies them to be a holy of holies. And what is their sanctity? Whatever touches them shall become holy. [I.e.,] whatever is fit for [placement in] a service vessel, when it enters them [the vessels], it becomes intrinsically holy so that it becomes unfit [to be an offering] if it goes out [of its designated boundaries], if it stays [out] overnight, or if [it comes in contact with] a person who has immersed himself [from uncleanness] on that day, and it may not be redeemed to become ordinary [unsanctified] food. Something unfit for them [i.e., for the service vessels], however, they [the vessels] do not sanctify (Zev. 87a). This was taught as an explicit Mishnah concerning the altar [i.e., a Baraitha, Zev. 83b]: Since it is stated: “Whatever touches the altar will be holy” (Exod. 29:37), I understand it to mean whether it is fit or unfit. Therefore, [to clarify this,] the Torah states [that] lambs [are to be sacrificed upon the altar]. Because just as lambs are fit, so is anything else that is fit [sanctified if it comes in contact with the altar]. Every anointment of the Mishkan, the kohanim, and the kings is translated [by Onkelos] as an expression of greatness because there is no need to anoint them except in order to proclaim their greatness. So did the King [God] decree, that this [the anointment] is their initiation into greatness. Other anointments, however, such as anointed wafers, “and with the first oils they anoint themselves” (Amos 6:6), their Aramaic [translation] is the same as the Hebrew. וקדשת אותם: משיחה זו מקדשתם להיות קדש קדשים, ומה היא קדושתם, כל הנוגע וגו', כל הראוי לכלי שרת משנכנס לתוכו קדוש קדושת הגוף ליפסל ביוצא ובלינה ובטבול יום, ואינו נפדה לצאת לחולין, אבל דבר שאינו ראוי להם אין מקדשין. ושנויה היא משנה שלימה אצל מזבח, מתוך שנאמר (שמות כט לז) כל הנוגע במזבח יקדש, שומע אני בין ראוי בין שאינו ראוי, תלמוד לומר כבשים, מה כבשים ראויים אף כל ראוי. כל משיחת משכן וכהנים ומלכים מתורגם לשון רבוי, לפי שאין צורך משיחתן אלא לגדולה, כי כן יסד המלך, שזה חנוך גדולתן, ושאר משיחות כגון (שמות כט ב) רקיקין משוחין, (עמוס ו ו) וראשית שמנים ימשחו, לשון ארמית בהן כלשון עברית:
30And with it you shall anoint Aaron and his sons and sanctify them to serve Me [as kohanim]. לוְאֶת־אַֽהֲרֹ֥ן וְאֶת־בָּנָ֖יו תִּמְשָׁ֑ח וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ֥ אֹתָ֖ם לְכַהֵ֥ן לִֽי:
31And to the children of Israel you shall speak, saying: 'This shall be oil of holy anointment to Me for your generations. לאוְאֶל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל תְּדַבֵּ֣ר לֵאמֹ֑ר שֶׁ֠מֶן מִשְׁחַת־קֹ֨דֶשׁ יִֽהְיֶ֥ה זֶ֛ה לִ֖י לְדֹרֹֽתֵיכֶֽם:
for your generations: From here our Rabbis deduced that it [the anointing oil made by Moses] will all remain in existence in the future. -[from Horioth 11b] לדרתיכם: מכאן למדו רבותינו לומר שכולו קיים לעתיד לבא:
This: Heb. זֶה. In gematria, this equals twelve logs. [ ז, ה, totaling 12.] -[from Horioth 11b] זה: בגימטריה תריסר לוגין הוו:
32It shall not be poured upon human flesh, and according to its formula you shall not make anything like it. It is holy; it shall be holy to you. לבעַל־בְּשַׂ֤ר אָדָם֙ לֹ֣א יִיסָ֔ךְ וּבְמַ֨תְכֻּנְתּ֔וֹ לֹ֥א תַֽעֲשׂ֖וּ כָּמֹ֑הוּ קֹ֣דֶשׁ ה֔וּא קֹ֖דֶשׁ יִֽהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶֽם:
It shall not be poured: Heb. לֹא יִיסָ. [This is spelled] with two “yud” s. It is an expression [in the form] of לֹא יִפְעַל, it shall not do, like, “and in order that it be good (יִיטַב) for you” (Deut. 5:16). לא ייסך: בשני יודי"ן, לשון לא יפעל, כמו (דברים ה טו) למען ייטב לך:
It shall not be poured upon human flesh: from this very oil. על בשר אדם לא ייסך: מן השמן הזה עצמו:
and according to its formula you shall not make anything like it: With the amount of its ingredients you shall not make another like it, but if one decreased or increased the ingredients according to the measure of a hin of oil, it is permitted. Also, the [oil] made according to the formula of this [oil]-the one who anoints himself [with it] is not liable, only the one who mixes it. -[from Ker. 5a] ובמתכנתו לא תעשו כמהו: בסכום סמניו לא תעשו אחר כמוהו במשקל סמנין הללו לפי מדת הין שמן, אבל אם פחת או רבה סממנין לפי מדת הין שמן מותר, ואף העשוי במתכונתו של זה, אין הסך ממנו חייב אלא הרוקחו:
according to its formula: Heb. וּבְמַתְכֻּנְךְתּוֹ, a word meaning a number, like “the number of (מַתְכֹּנֶת) bricks” (Exod. 5:8), and so, בְּמַתְכֻּנְךְתָּה, mentioned in reference to the incense (below, verse 37). ובמתכנתו: לשון חשבון, כמו (שמות ה ח) מתכנת הלבנים, וכן במתכונתה של קטורת:
33Any person who compounds anything like it or puts any of it on an alien shall be cut off from his people.' " לגאִ֚ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִרְקַ֣ח כָּמֹ֔הוּ וַֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר יִתֵּ֛ן מִמֶּ֖נּוּ עַל־זָ֑ר וְנִכְרַ֖ת מֵֽעַמָּֽיו:
or puts any of it: Of that [oil] of [i.e., made by] Moses. [However, anyone who anoints himself with oil that was made copying the original anointing oil is not liable.] -[from Ker. 5a] ואשר יתן ממנו: מאותו של משה:
on an alien: [I.e.,] which is not needed for the kehunah or the kingship. על זר: שאינו צורך כהונה ומלכות:
34And the Lord said to Moses: "Take for yourself aromatics, [namely] balsam sap, onycha and galbanum, aromatics and pure frankincense; they shall be of equal weight. לדוַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֶל־משֶׁ֜ה קַח־לְךָ֣ סַמִּ֗ים נָטָ֤ף | וּשְׁחֵ֨לֶת֙ וְחֶלְבְּנָ֔ה סַמִּ֖ים וּלְבֹנָ֣ה זַכָּ֑ה בַּ֥ד בְּבַ֖ד יִֽהְיֶֽה:
balsam sap: Heb. נָטָף. This is balm (צֳרִי), but since it is only the sap that drips (נוֹטֵף) from the balsam trees, it is called נָטָף (Ker. 6a), and in French, gomme, gum resin. The balm itself, however, is called triaca [in Old Provencal], theriac. נטף: הוא צרי, ועל שאינו אלא שרף הנוטף מעצי הקטף קרוי נטף ובלעז גומ"א, והצרי קורין לו תירייק"א ושחלת - שורש בשם חלק ומצהיר כצפורן, ובלשון המשנה קרוי צפורן, וזהו שתרגם אונקלוס וטופרא:
onycha: Heb. וּשְׁחֵלֶת, a root of a spice, smooth and shiny as fingernails, and in the language of the Mishnah (Ker. 6a) it is called צִפֹּרֶן. This is what Onkelos renders as וְטוּפְרָא. [Both צִפֹּרֶן and טוּפְרָא mean “fingernail.”] וחלבנה: בשם שריחו רע וקורין לו גלבנא, ומנאה הכתוב בין סמני הקטורת, ללמדנו, שלא יקל בעינינו לצרף עמנו באגודת תעניותינו ותפלותינו את פושעי ישראל שיהיו נמנין עמנו:
and galbanum: A spice with a vile odor, called galbane [in Old French], galbanum. The Scripture counted it among the ingredients of the incense [in order] to teach us that we should not look askance at including Jewish transgressors with us when we assemble for fasting or prayer. [The Torah instructs us] that they should be counted with us. -[from Ker. 6b] סמים: אחרים:
aromatics: Heb. סַמִּים. Other [aromatics]. -[from Ker. 6b] ולבנה זכה: מכאן למדו רבותינו אחד עשר סמנין נאמרו לו למשה בסיני מיעוט סמים שנים, נטף ושחלת וחלבנה שלשה, הרי חמישה, סמים, לרבות עוד כמו אלו, הרי עשרה, ולבונה הרי אחד עשר ואלו הן הצרי והצפורן, החלבנה והלבונה, מור וקציעה, שבולת נרד וכרכם, הרי שמונה, שהשבולת ונרד אחד, שהנרד דומה לשבולת, הקושט והקילופה והקנמון הרי אחד עשר. בורית כרשינה אינו נקטר אלא בו שפין את הצפורן ללבנה שתהא נאה:
and pure frankincense: From here our Rabbis learned that eleven ingredients were told to Moses [when he was] at Sinai: the minimum of aromatics-two [since סַמִּים is written in the plural form]; balsam sap, onycha, and galbanum-three, equaling five; aromatics [written a second time]-to include again the number of these, equaling ten; and frankincense, totaling eleven. They are as follows: (1) balsam sap, (2) onycha, (3) galbanum, (4) frankincense, (5) myrrh, (6) cassia, (7) spikenard נֵרְדְּ) (שִׁבֹּלֶת, and (8) saffron, totaling eight, because שִׁבֹּלֶת and נֵרְדְּ are one, for spikenard נֵרְדְּ is like an ear [of grain] שִׁבֹּלֶת. [To continue:] (9) costus, (10) aromatic bark, and (11) cinnamon, thus totaling eleven. Borith carshina [mentioned further in the Baraitha, is not counted because it] does not go up in smoke, but they rub the onycha with it to whiten it so that it should be beautiful. -[from Ker. 6a] בד בבד יהיה: אלו הארבעה הנזכרים כאן יהיו שוין משקל במשקל, כמשקלו של זה כך משקלו של זה, וכן שנינו (כריתות ו א) הצרי והצפורן, החלבנה והלבונה משקל שבעים שבעים מנה. ולשון בד נראה בעיני שהוא לשון יחיד, אחד באחד, יהיה זה כמו זה:
they shall be of equal weight: Heb. יִהְיֶה בַּד בְּבַד. These four [ingredients] mentioned here [explicitly] shall be equal, a weight for a weight. Like the weight of one, so shall be the weight of the other. So we learned (Ker. 6a): The balsam, the onycha, the galbanum, and the frankincense the weight of each was seventy manehs. The word בַּד appears to me to mean a unit; each one [i. e., the weight] shall be this one like that one. :
35And you shall make it into incense, a compound according to the art of the perfumer, well blended, pure, holy. להוְעָשִׂ֤יתָ אֹתָהּ֙ קְטֹ֔רֶת רֹ֖קַח מַֽעֲשֵׂ֣ה רוֹקֵ֑חַ מְמֻלָּ֖ח טָה֥וֹר קֹֽדֶשׁ:
well blended: Heb. מְמֻלָח, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: מְעָרֵב, mixed. He should mix their [the spices’] powder thoroughly, one with the other. Accordingly, I say that [the following] are similar to this: “And the sailors (הַמַּלָּחִים) were frightened” (Jonah 1:5); “your sailors (מַלָחַיִ) and your mariners” (Ezek. 27:27). [Sailors are given this appellation] because they turn over the water with oars when they propel the ship, like a person who turns over beaten eggs with a spoon to blend them with water. And anything that a person wishes to blend thoroughly, he turns over with his finger or with a spoon. ממלח: כתרגומו מעורב, שיערב שחיקתן יפה יפה זה עם זה. ואומר אני שדומה לו (יונה א ה) וייראו המלחים, (יחזקאל כז כז) מלחיך וחובליך, על שם שמהפכין את המים במשוטות, כשמנהיגים את הספינה, כאדם המהפך בכף ביצים טרופות לערבן עם המים, וכל דבר שהאדם רוצה לערב יפה יפה, מהפכו באצבע או בבזך:
well blended, pure, holy: It shall be well blended; it shall be pure, and it shall be holy. ממלח טהור קדש: ממולח יהיה וטהור יהיה וקדש יהיה:
36And you shall crush some of it very finely, and you shall set some of it before the testimony in the Tent of Meeting, where I will arrange meetings with you; it shall be to you a holy of holies. לווְשָֽׁחַקְתָּ֣ מִמֶּ֘נָּה֘ הָדֵק֒ וְנָֽתַתָּ֨ה מִמֶּ֜נָּה לִפְנֵ֤י הָֽעֵדֻת֙ בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד אֲשֶׁ֛ר אִוָּעֵ֥ד לְךָ֖ שָׁ֑מָּה קֹ֥דֶשׁ קָֽדָשִׁ֖ים תִּֽהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶֽם:
and you shall set some of it: This is the daily incense, which is on the inner altar, which is in the Tent of Meeting. ונתתה ממנה וגו': היא קטרת שבכל יום ויום שעל מזבח הפנימי, שהוא באהל מועד:
where I will arrange meetings with you: All appointments to speak that I will set up for you, I will set up for that place. אשר אועד לך שמה: כל מועדי דבור שאקבע לך, אני קובעם לאותו מקום:
37And the incense that you make, you shall not make for yourselves according to its formula; it shall be holy to you for the Lord. לזוְהַקְּטֹ֨רֶת֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֔ה בְּמַ֨תְכֻּנְתָּ֔הּ לֹ֥א תַֽעֲשׂ֖וּ לָכֶ֑ם קֹ֛דֶשׁ תִּֽהְיֶ֥ה לְךָ֖ לַֽיהֹוָֽה:
according to its formula: According to the number of its ingredients. במתכנתה: במנין סממניה:
it shall be holy to you for the Lord: That you shall not make it except for My Name. קדש תהיה לך לה': שלא תעשנה אלא לשמי:
38Any person who makes anything like it, to smell it[s fragrance], shall be cut off from his people. לחאִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה כָמ֖וֹהָ לְהָרִ֣יחַ בָּ֑הּ וְנִכְרַ֖ת מֵֽעַמָּֽיו:
to smell it[s fragrance]: But you may make it according to its formula of your own [ingredients] in order to deliver it to the community. -[from Ker. 5a] להריח בה: אבל עושה אתה במתכונתה משלך כדי למוסרה לצבור:
Exodus Chapter 31
1The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: אוַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
2"See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, ברְאֵ֖ה קָרָ֣אתִי בְשֵׁ֑ם בְּצַלְאֵ֛ל בֶּן־אוּרִ֥י בֶן־ח֖וּר לְמַטֵּ֥ה יְהוּדָֽה:
I have called by name: to perform My work Bezalel. קראתי בשם: לעשות מלאכתי, את בצלאל:
3and I have imbued him with the spirit of God, with wisdom, with insight, with knowledge, and with [talent for] all manner of craftsmanship גוָֽאֲמַלֵּ֥א אֹת֖וֹ ר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֑ים בְּחָכְמָ֛ה וּבִתְבוּנָ֥ה וּבְדַ֖עַת וּבְכָל־מְלָאכָֽה:
with wisdom: [I.e.,] what a person hears from others and learns. -[from Sifrei Deut. 1:13] בחכמה: מה שאדם שומע מאחרים ולמד:
with insight: With his intellect he understands other things based on what he learned. -[from Sifrei Deut. 1:13] ובתבונה: מבין דבר מלבו, מתוך דברים שלמד:
with knowledge: The holy spirit. ובדעת: רוח הקדש:
4to do master weaving, to work with gold, with silver, and with copper, דלַחְשֹׁ֖ב מַֽחֲשָׁבֹ֑ת לַֽעֲשׂ֛וֹת בַּזָּהָ֥ב וּבַכֶּ֖סֶף וּבַנְּחֽשֶׁת:
to do master weaving: Heb. לַחְשֹׁב מַחִשָׁבֹת, the weaving work of a master weaver. לחשוב מחשבת: אריגת מעשה חושב:
5with the craft of stones for setting and with the craft of wood, to do every [manner of] work. הוּבַֽחֲר֥שֶׁת אֶ֛בֶן לְמַלֹּ֖את וּבַֽחֲר֣שֶׁת עֵ֑ץ לַֽעֲשׂ֖וֹת בְּכָל־מְלָאכָֽה:
with the craft: Heb. וּבַחִרשֶׁת, a term denoting a craft, like “a skilled craftsman (חָרָשׁ) ” (Isa. 40:20). Onkelos, however, explained [this term] but varied [the wording] in their explanation [i.e., in the explanation of the two mentions of חִרשֶׁ. וּבַחִרשֶׁתאֶבֶן he rendered וּבְאוּמָנוּתאִבַן טָבָא, and בַחִרשֶׁתעֵץ he rendered וּבְנַגָּרוּתאָעָא, because a craftsman of stones is called אוּמָן, craftsman, whereas a craftsman of wood is called נַגַָָּר, carpenter. ובחרשת: לשון אומנות, כמו (ישעיה מ כ) חרש חכם, ואונקלוס פירש ושנה בפירושן, שחרש אבנים קרוי אומן, וחרש עץ קרוי נגר:
for setting: Heb. לְמַלֹאת, lit., to fill. To set it [each stone] into its setting in its fullness, [i.e.,] to make the setting equal to the measurement of the bottom of the stone and its thickness. [See commentary on Exod. 25:7.] למלאת: להושיבה במשבצת שלה במלואה, לעשות המשבצת למדת מושב האבן ועוביה:
6And, behold, with him I have placed Oholiab the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, and all the wise hearted into whose hearts I have instilled wisdom, and they shall make everything I have commanded you: ווַֽאֲנִ֞י הִנֵּ֧ה נָתַ֣תִּי אִתּ֗וֹ אֵ֣ת אָֽהֳלִיאָ֞ב בֶּן־אֲחִֽיסָמָךְ֙ לְמַטֵּה־דָ֔ן וּבְלֵ֥ב כָּל־חֲכַם־לֵ֖ב נָתַ֣תִּי חָכְמָ֑ה וְעָשׂ֕וּ אֵ֖ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוִּיתִֽךָ:
and all the wise-hearted into whose hearts I have instilled wisdom:And additionally, other wise-hearted people among you [shall assist], as well as everyone into whom I have instilled wisdom, and [all of them] shall make everything I have commanded you. ובלב כל חכם לב וגו': ועוד שאר חכמי לב יש בכם, וכל אשר נתתי בו חכמה ועשו את כל אשר צויתיך:
7The Tent of Meeting and the ark for the testimony, as well as the cover that [shall be] upon it, all the implements of the tent, זאֵ֣ת | אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֗ד וְאֶת־הָֽאָרֹן֙ לָֽעֵדֻ֔ת וְאֶת־הַכַּפֹּ֖רֶת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָלָ֑יו וְאֵ֖ת כָּל־כְּלֵ֥י הָאֹֽהֶל:
and the ark for the testimony: For the purpose of the tablets of the testimony. ואת הארן לעדת: לצורך לוחות העדות:
8the table and its implements, the pure menorah and all its implements, the altar of incense, חוְאֶת־הַשֻּׁלְחָן֙ וְאֶת־כֵּלָ֔יו וְאֶת־הַמְּנֹרָ֥ה הַטְּהֹרָ֖ה וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלֶ֑יהָ וְאֵ֖ת מִזְבַּ֥ח הַקְּטֹֽרֶת:
the pure: Heb. הַטְּהֹרָה. [The menorah is described by this adjective] because [it was made] of pure gold. [based on Exod. 25:31] הטהרה: על שם זהב טהור:
9the altar for the burnt offering and all its implements, the washstand and its base, טוְאֶת־מִזְבַּ֥ח הָֽעֹלָ֖ה וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֑יו וְאֶת־הַכִּיּ֖וֹר וְאֶת־כַּנּֽוֹ:
10the meshwork garments, the holy garments for Aaron the kohen, the garments of his sons [in which] to serve [as kohanim], יוְאֵ֖ת בִּגְדֵ֣י הַשְּׂרָ֑ד וְאֶת־בִּגְדֵ֤י הַקֹּ֨דֶשׁ֙ לְאַֽהֲרֹ֣ן הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְאֶת־בִּגְדֵ֥י בָנָ֖יו לְכַהֵֽן:
the meshwork garments: Heb. בִּגְדֵי הַשְְׂרָד In my opinion, according to the simple meaning of the verse, it is impossible to say that the garments of the kehunah are referred to [here], because it says next to them [at the end of the verse], “the holy garments for Aaron the kohen, the garments of his sons [in which] to serve [as kohanim].” But these בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד [referred to here] are the garments of blue, purple, and crimson wool mentioned in the section dealing with the travels (Num. 4:6-13): “and they shall place upon it a garment of blue wool,” “and they shall place upon it a garment of purple wool,” “and they shall place upon them a garment of crimson wool.” My assertion [that בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד refers to the coverings of the vessels] appears correct, since it says: “And from the blue wool, the purple wool, and the crimson they made בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד ” (Exod. 39:1), but linen was not mentioned with them. Now, if it [the text] is speaking of the garments of the kehunah, we do not find in any of them [reference to] purple or crimson wool without [the addition of] linen. בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד Some [commentators] explain בִּגְדֵי הַשְׂרָד as an expression of work and service, like its [Aramaic] translation, לְבוּשֵׁי שִׁמוּשָׁא, and it has no similarity in the Scriptures. But I believe that it is Aramaic, like the [Aramaic] translation of קְלָעִים [hangings, translated סְרָדִין] (Exod. 27:9) and the [Aramaic] translation of מִכְבָּר [grating, translated סְרָדָא] (Exod. 27:4), for they were woven with a needle [and] made of many holes, lazediz in Old French, mesh-work, crochet-work, [or] lace. ואת בגדי השרד: אומר אני לפי פשוטו של מקרא אי אפשר לומר שבבגדי כהונה מדבר, לפי שנאמר אצלם ואת בגדי הקדש לאהרן הכהן ואת בגדי בניו לכהן, אלא אלו בגדי השרד, הם בגדי התכלת והארגמן ותולעת שני, האמורין בפרשת מסעות (במדבר ד יב) ונתנו אל בגד תכלת, (שם יג) ופרשו עליו בגד ארגמן, (שם ח) ופרשו עליהם בגד תולעת שני. ונראין דברי, שנאמר (שמות לט א) ומן התכלת והארגמן ותולעת השני עשו בגדי שרד לשרת בקדש, ולא הוזכר שש עמהם, ואם בבגדי כהונה מדבר, לא מצינו באחד מהם ארגמן או תולעת שני בלא שש:
11the anointing oil and the incense for the Holy; in complete accordance with everything I have commanded you they shall do." יאוְאֵ֨ת שֶׁ֧מֶן הַמִּשְׁחָ֛ה וְאֶת־קְטֹ֥רֶת הַסַּמִּ֖ים לַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ כְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־צִוִּיתִ֖ךָ יַֽעֲשֽׂוּ:
and the incense for the Holy: For the purpose of bringing [incense] up in smoke in the Heichal, which is holy. ואת קטרת הסמים לקדש: לצורך הקטרת ההיכל שהוא קדש:
12The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: יבוַיֹּ֥אמֶר יְהֹוָ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר:
13"And you, speak to the children of Israel and say: 'Only keep My Sabbaths! For it is a sign between Me and you for your generations, to know that I, the Lord, make you holy. יגוְאַתָּ֞ה דַּבֵּ֨ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר אַ֥ךְ אֶת־שַׁבְּתֹתַ֖י תִּשְׁמֹ֑רוּ כִּי֩ א֨וֹת הִ֜וא בֵּינִ֤י וּבֵֽינֵיכֶם֙ לְדֹרֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם לָדַ֕עַת כִּ֛י אֲנִ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה מְקַדִּשְׁכֶֽם:
And you, speak to the children of Israel: But [as for] you, although I have mandated you to command them [the Israelites] concerning the work of the Mishkan, do not let it seem to you that you may easily set aside the Sabbath because of that work. ואתה דבר אל בני ישראל: ואתה, אף על פי שהפקדתיך לצוותם על מלאכת המשכן, אל יקל בעיניך לדחות את השבת מפני אותה מלאכה:
Only keep My Sabbaths!: Although you will be rushed to perform the work [of the Mishkan] quickly, the Sabbath shall not be set aside because of it. All instances of אַ and רַק [imply limitations, i.e.,] are exclusive, to exclude the Sabbath from the work of the Mishkan. אך את שבתתי תשמרו: אף על פי שתהיו רדופין וזריזין בזריזות מלאכה שבת אל תדחה מפניה. כל אכין ורקין מיעוטין, למעט שבת ממלאכת המשכן:
For it is a sign between Me and you: It is a sign of distinction between us that I have chosen you, by granting you as an inheritance My day of rest for [your] rest. כי אות הוא ביני וביניכם: אות גדולה היא בינינו שבחרתי בכם, בהנחילי לכם את יום מנוחתי למנוחה:
to know: [So that] the nations [should know] that I, the Lord, sanctify you. לדעת: האומות [בה] כי אני ה' מקדשכם:
14Therefore, keep the Sabbath, for it is a sacred thing for you. Those who desecrate it shall be put to death, for whoever performs work on it, that soul will be cut off from the midst of its people. ידוּשְׁמַרְתֶּם֙ אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּ֔ת כִּ֛י קֹ֥דֶשׁ הִ֖וא לָכֶ֑ם מְחַֽלֲלֶ֨יהָ֙ מ֣וֹת יוּמָ֔ת כִּ֗י כָּל־הָֽעֹשֶׂ֥ה בָהּ֙ מְלָאכָ֔ה וְנִכְרְתָ֛ה הַנֶּ֥פֶשׁ הַהִ֖וא מִקֶּ֥רֶב עַמֶּֽיהָ:
shall be put to death: If there are witnesses and a warning. מות יומת: אם יש עדים והתראה:
will be cut off: without warning. -[from Mechilta] ונכרתה: בלא התראה:
Those who desecrate it: Heb. מְחַלְלֶיהָ, [those] who treat its sanctity as profane. מחלליה: הנוהג בה חול בקדושתה:
15Six days work may be done, but on the seventh day is a Sabbath of complete rest, holy to the Lord; whoever performs work on the Sabbath day shall be put to death.' טושֵׁ֣שֶׁת יָמִים֘ יֵֽעָשֶׂ֣ה מְלָאכָה֒ וּבַיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֗י שַׁבַּ֧ת שַׁבָּת֛וֹן קֹ֖דֶשׁ לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה כָּל־הָֽעֹשֶׂ֧ה מְלָאכָ֛ה בְּי֥וֹם הַשַּׁבָּ֖ת מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת:
a Sabbath of complete rest: Heb. שַׁבָּתשַׁבָּתוֹן, a reposeful rest, not a casual rest. שבת שבתון: מנוחת מרגוע ולא מנוחת עראי:
(a Sabbath of complete rest: For this reason, Scripture repeated it [the word, שַׁבָּת], to inform [us] that on it all work is prohibited, even what is needed for food. Similarly regarding Yom Kippur, in whose context it says: “It is a Sabbath of complete rest for you” (Lev. 23:32), all work is prohibited. However, concerning festivals it says only: “on the first day is a rest, and on the eighth day is a rest” (Lev. 23:39), [meaning that] on them [i.e., on holidays] only servile work is prohibited, but work needed for food [preparation] is permitted.) שבת שבתון: לכך כפלו הכתוב לומר שאסור בכל מלאכה, אפילו אוכל נפש, וכן יום הכפורים שנאמר בו (ויקרא כג לב) שבת שבתון הוא לכם, אסור בכל מלאכה, אבל יום טוב לא נאמר בו כי אם ביום הראשון שבתון וביום השמיני שבתון (שם) אסורים בכל מלאכת עבודה, ומותרים במלאכת אוכל נפש:
holy to the Lord: The observance of its sanctity shall be for My name and by My commandment. קדש לה': שמירת קדושתה לשמי ובמצוותי:
16Thus shall the children of Israel observe the Sabbath, to make the Sabbath throughout their generations as an everlasting covenant. טזוְשָֽׁמְר֥וּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּ֑ת לַֽעֲשׂ֧וֹת אֶת־הַשַּׁבָּ֛ת לְדֹֽרֹתָ֖ם בְּרִ֥ית עוֹלָֽם:
17Between Me and the children of Israel, it is forever a sign that [in] six days The Lord created the heaven and the earth, and on the seventh day He ceased and rested." יזבֵּינִ֗י וּבֵין֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל א֥וֹת הִ֖וא לְעֹלָ֑ם כִּי־שֵׁ֣שֶׁת יָמִ֗ים עָשָׂ֤ה יְהֹוָה֙ אֶת־הַשָּׁמַ֣יִם וְאֶת־הָאָ֔רֶץ וּבַיּוֹם֙ הַשְּׁבִיעִ֔י שָׁבַ֖ת וַיִּנָּפַֽשׁ:
and rested: Heb. וַיִּנָפַשׁ. As the Targum [Onkelos] renders: וְנָח, and rested. Now every expression of נוֹפֶשׁ, rest, is an expression of נֶפֶשׁ, soul, for one regains one’s soul and one’s breath when one rests from the toil of work. He about Whom it is written: “He neither tires nor wearies” (Isa. 40:28), and Whose every act is performed by speech [alone, without physical effort], dictated rest in reference to Himself [only] in order to make it understood to the [human] ear with words that it can understand. וינפש: כתרגומו ונח, וכל לשון נופש והוא לשון נפש, שמשיב נפשו ונשימתו בהרגיעו מטורח מהמלאכה. ומי שכתוב בו (ישעיה מ כח) לא ייעף ולא יגע, וכל פעלו במאמר, הכתיב מנוחה לעצמו, לשבר האוזן מה שהיא יכולה לשמוע:
---------------------
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 66 - 68
• Hebrew text
• English text• Chapter 66
• Hebrew text
• English text• Chapter 66
This psalm describes the praises and awe-inspiring prayers that we will offer God upon the ingathering of the exiles.
1. For the Conductor, a song, a psalm. Raise your voices in jubilation to God, all the earth!
2. Sing the glory of His Name; make glorious His praise.
3. Say to God, "How awesome are Your deeds!" Because of Your great strength, Your enemies will [admit] their treachery to You.
4. All the earth will bow to You, and sing to You; they will sing praise to Your Name forever!
5. Go and see the works of God, awesome in His deeds toward mankind.
6. He turned the sea into dry land, and they passed through the river on foot; we rejoiced in Him there.
7. He rules the world with His might, and His eyes watch the nations; let the rebellious not exalt themselves, Selah.
8. Bless our God, O nations, and let the voice of His praise be heard.
9. He has kept us alive, and did not allow our feet to falter.
10. For You tested us, O God; You refined us as one refining silver.
11. You brought us into prison; You placed a chain upon our loins.
12. You mounted men over our head; we went through fire and water, and You brought us out to abundance.
13. I will enter Your House with burnt-offerings, I will pay to You my vows,
14. which my lips uttered and my mouth spoke in my distress.
15. I will offer up to You burnt-offerings of fat animals, with the smoke of rams; I will prepare cattle with he-goats, Selah.
16. Come listen, all you who fear God, and I will relate what He has done for my soul.
17. I called to Him with my mouth, with exaltation beneath my tongue.
18. Had I seen iniquity in my heart, my Lord would not have listened.
19. But in truth, God heard; He gave ear to the voice of my prayer.
20. Blessed is God Who has not turned away my prayer or His kindness from me.
Chapter 67
This psalm is known as an especially revered prayer. It, too, speaks of the era of the ingathering of the exiles, and the wars of Gog and Magog, a time when "the Lord will be One."
1. For the Conductor, a song with instrumental music, a psalm.
2. May God be gracious to us and bless us; may He make His countenance shine upon us forever,
3. that Your way be known on earth, Your salvation among all nations.
4. The nations will extol You, O God; all the nations will extol You.
5. The nations will rejoice and sing for joy, for You will judge the peoples justly and guide the nations on earth forever.
6. The peoples will extol You, O God; all the peoples will extol You,
7. for the earth will have yielded its produce, and God, our God, will bless us.
8. God will bless us; and all, from the farthest corners of the earth, shall fear Him.
Chapter 68
An awe-inspiring and wondrous prayer, David composed this psalm referring to a future event, when Sennacherib would surround Jerusalem on Passover, during the reign of Hezekiah. He also prophesies about the good we will enjoy during the Messianic era.
1. For the Conductor; by David, a psalm, a song.
2. Let God rise, let His enemies be scattered, and let His enemies flee before Him.
3. As smoke is driven away, drive them away; as wax melts before fire, let the wicked perish before God.
4. And the righteous will rejoice, they will exult before God and delight with joy.
5. Sing to God, chant praises to His Name; extol Him Who rides upon the heavens with His Name, Yah, and exult before Him.
6. A father of orphans and judge of widows is God, in the abode of His holiness.
7. God settles the solitary into a home, and frees those bound in shackles; but the rebellious [are left to] dwell in an arid land.
8. O God, when You went out before Your nation, when You marched through the wilderness, Selah,
9. the earth trembled, even the heavens dripped before the presence of God; this mountain of Sinai [trembled] before the presence of God, the God of Israel.
10. You poured generous rain, O God; when Your heritage was weary, You secured it.
11. Your flock settled there; in Your goodness, O God, You prepare for the poor.
12. My Lord will fulfill the word of the heralds to a great legion:
13. Kings of armies will flee, they will flee; and she who inhabits the home will divide the loot.
14. Even if you lie upon the hearth,1 [you will be like] wings of a dove covered with silver, her pinions with brilliant gold.
15. When the Almighty scatters kings in her midst, those in the shadow of darkness will be made snow-white.
16. The mountain of God is a fertile mountain, the mountain of majestic peaks is a fertile mountain.
17. Why do you prance, O mountains of peaks? This is the mountain God has desired as His dwelling; the Lord will even dwell there forever.
18. The chariots of God are twice ten thousand, [with] thousands of angels; my Lord is in their midst, at Sinai, in holiness.
19. You ascended on high and took a captive,2 you seized gifts for man; and [now] even rebels dwell with Yah, God.
20. Blessed is my Lord, Who each day loads us [with beneficence], the God Who is our deliverance forever.
21. The Lord is a God of deliverances for us; and to God, my Lord, are the many avenues of death.
22. God alone crushes the heads of His enemies, the hairy skull of him who goes about in his guilt.
23. My Lord said, "I will bring back from Bashan,3 I will bring back from the depths of the sea,
24. that your foot may wade through [the enemy's] blood; that the tongue of your dogs may have its portion from your enemies.”
25. They saw Your ways, O God, the ways of my God, my King, in holiness.
26. The singers began, then the musicians, in the midst of the maidens playing timbrels.
27. In assemblies bless God; [bless] my Lord, O you who stem from Israel.
28. There Benjamin, the youngest, rules them; the princes of Judah stone them, [as do] the princes of Zebulun, and the princes of Naphtali.
29. Your God has decreed your strength. Show Your strength, O God, Who has wrought this for our sake.
30. Because of [the glory of] Your Sanctuary upon Jerusalem, kings will bring You tribute.
31. Rebuke the wild beast of the reeds, the assembly of mighty bulls among the calves of nations, [until] each submits himself with pieces of silver. Scatter the nations that desire wars.
32. Nobles will come from Egypt; Kush will hasten [to raise] its hands to God.
33. Kingdoms of the earth, sing to God; sing praise to my Lord forever!
34. To the One Who rides upon the loftiest of ancient heavens-behold He gives forth His voice, a voice of might.
35. Ascribe power to God; His majesty is over Israel, and His might is in the skies.
36. God, You are feared from Your Sanctuary; it is the God of Israel Who grants strength and power to His people; blessed is God.
FOOTNOTES
1.And dirty yourself in exile (Metzudot).
2.Israel ascended on high and seized the Torah from the Angels (Metzudot).
3.From amongst the nations who are compared to “bulls of Bashan” (Metzudot).
---------------------
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 29
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 29
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Sunday, Adar I 12, 5776 · February 21, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 29
ואם כן הוא רחוק מה׳ בתכלית הריחוק, שהרי כח המתאוה שבנפשו הבהמית יכול גם כן להתאוות לדברים האסורים, שהם נגד רצונו יתברך
If so, that he is actually the animal soul, he is removed from G‑d with the utmost remoteness. For the lusting drive in his animal soul is capable of lusting also after forbidden things, which are contrary to G‑d’s Will.
אף שאינו מתאוה לעשותם בפועל ממש, חס ושלום, רק שאינם מאוסים אצלו באמת כבצדיקים, כמו שכתוב לעיל פרק י״ב
While he does not desire to do them (these forbidden things) in actual practice, G‑d forbid, yet they are not truly repulsive to him, as they are to tzaddikim, as explained above (in ch. 12).
There the Alter Rebbe explains that after his prayers, when the love of G‑d is no longer revealed in his heart, a Beinoni can feel a craving for material pleasures, whether they be permitted or forbidden — except that in the case of forbidden matters, he does not actually wish to implement his desires in forbidden actions; they remain instead in the category of “sinful thoughts.”
ובזה הוא גרוע ומשוקץ ומתועב יותר מבעלי חיים הטמאים ושקצים ורמשים, כנ״ל
In this he is inferior to and more loathsome and abominable than unclean animals and insects and reptiles, as mentioned above — for even they do not transgress against G‑d’s Will (see ch. 24), and since he does do so (in his mind, at least) he is worse than they;
וכמו שכתוב: ואנכי תולעת ולא איש וגו׳
and as it is written: 1 “But I am a worm, and not a man...”
As a human being who chooses to lower himself to the level of a worm, I am worse than a worm, for it is a worm by creation rather than by choice.
But what of the times when the divine soul of the Beinoni dominates him, such as during prayer, when he experiences a revealed love of G‑d and there is no room in his heart for any mundane desires? To this the Alter Rebbe answers:
וגם כשמתגברת בו נפשו האלקית לעורר האהבה לה׳ בשעת התפלה, אינה באמת לאמיתו לגמרי, מאחר שחולפת ועוברת אחר התפלה כנ״ל, סוף פרק י״ג
(2Even when his divine soul gathers strength within him to arouse his love of G‑d during prayer, thispredominance of the divine soul is not altogether genuine, since it is transient and vanishes after prayer, as mentioned earlier, end of ch. 13.)
The Alter Rebbe explains there that only that which is permanent and unchanging can be described as “true”. Relative to the rank of Beinoni, this arousal of the divine soul during prayer may be considered “truthful”, since the Beinoni is capable of generating it always — whenever he prays. It cannot, however, be described as “absolutely truthful” (emet la‘amito) since it is not constant, occurring only during prayer.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Tehillim 22:7. |
| 2. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
---------------------
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Sunday, Adar I 12, 5776 · February 21, 2016
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 150
Inspecting Birds for Kosher Signs
"You may eat all clean birds"—Deuteronomy 14:11.
We are commanded to inspect fowl before consuming them, to ascertain whether they possess the signs that characterize non-kosher birds. Though the Torah doesn't specify signs for non-kosher fowl, rather it supplies us with a list of forbidden fowl species, nevertheless, when studying the group of the listed birds, we can isolate certain common signs that they all share.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Positive Commandment 151
Inspecting Grasshoppers for Kosher Signs
"Yet these you may eat of every flying creeping thing"—Leviticus 11:21.
We are commanded to inspect grasshoppers before consuming them, to ascertain whether they possess the kosher sign: "jointed [leg like] extensions above their [regular] legs."
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Positive Commandment 152
Inspecting Fish for Kosher Signs
"These you shall eat of all that is in the water"—Leviticus 11:9.
We are commanded to inspect fish before consuming them, to ascertain whether they possess the kosher signs [—fins and scales].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 172
Non-Kosher Mammals
"These you shall not eat of those that [only] chew the cud or of those that [only] have the cloven hoof..."—Deuteronomy 14:7.
It is forbidden to eat any mammal that doesn't possess both kosher signs—split hooves and chewing cud.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 174
Non-Kosher Birds
"And these you shall detest among the birds, they shall not be eaten"—Leviticus 11:13.
It is forbidden to eat any non-kosher bird.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Sunday, Adar I 12, 5776 · February 21, 2016Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 150
Inspecting Birds for Kosher Signs
"You may eat all clean birds"—Deuteronomy 14:11.
We are commanded to inspect fowl before consuming them, to ascertain whether they possess the signs that characterize non-kosher birds. Though the Torah doesn't specify signs for non-kosher fowl, rather it supplies us with a list of forbidden fowl species, nevertheless, when studying the group of the listed birds, we can isolate certain common signs that they all share.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Inspecting Birds for Kosher Signs
Positive Commandment 150
Translated by Berel Bell
The 150th mitzvah is that we are also commanded regarding the signs of birds; that only certain species are permissible. These signs are not listed in Scripture, but have been determined by investigation; that after examining each and every of the prohibited species, we have found characteristics common to all of them. These are the signs of a non-kosher bird.1 That we have been commanded to examine birds and declare one type non-kosher and another kosher is the positive commandment.
The Sifri says, "The statement,2 'You may eat every kosher bird,' is a positive commandment.' " This states clearly what we hinted to above.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Chullin.
FOOTNOTES
1.See Hilchos Ma'achalos Asuros, 1:16.
2.Deut. 14:11.
------------------------------------Positive Commandment 151
Inspecting Grasshoppers for Kosher Signs
"Yet these you may eat of every flying creeping thing"—Leviticus 11:21.
We are commanded to inspect grasshoppers before consuming them, to ascertain whether they possess the kosher sign: "jointed [leg like] extensions above their [regular] legs."
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Inspecting Grasshoppers for Kosher Signs
Positive Commandment 151
Translated by Berel Bell
The 151st mitzvah is that we are also commanded regarding the signs of grasshoppers. These signs are explained in Scripture as knees which extend above the feet.
This mitzvah is similar to the preceding ones, the relevant verse being,1 "The only flying insects [with four walking legs] that you may eat are...."
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the third chapter of tractate Chullin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 11:21.
-------------------------------------Positive Commandment 152
Inspecting Fish for Kosher Signs
"These you shall eat of all that is in the water"—Leviticus 11:9.
We are commanded to inspect fish before consuming them, to ascertain whether they possess the kosher signs [—fins and scales].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Inspecting Fish for Kosher Signs
Positive Commandment 152
Translated by Berel Bell
The 152nd mitzvah is that we are commanded regarding the signs of fish. These signs are explained in Scripture in G‑d's statement,1 "This is what you may eat of all that is in the water."
Our Sages said explicitly in Gemara Chullin,2 "One who eats a non-kosher fish transgresses both a positive commandment and a prohibition." This is because the statement "this you may eat" implies that other things you may not eat, and that a prohibition which is implied from a positive commandment is counted as a positive commandment. This shows that the phrase, "This is what you may eat" constitutes a positive commandment.
As mentioned previously, when we say that this is a positive commandment, we mean that we are commanded to judge according to these signs and declare "this may be eaten" and "this may not be eaten." This is clear from the verse,3 "You must separate out the clean animals and birds from the unclean," and this distinction can only be made through [examining] the signs. Therefore, each of these four categories of signs — those of beheimos and chayos, of birds, of grasshoppers, and of fish — constitutes a separate mitzvah. We have already quoted the language of our Sages where each is called a separate positive commandment.
The details of this mitzvah — regarding the signs of fish — are explained in the third chapter of tractate Chullin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 11:9.
2.66b.
3.Lev. 20:25.
--------------------------------------Negative Commandment 172
Non-Kosher Mammals
"These you shall not eat of those that [only] chew the cud or of those that [only] have the cloven hoof..."—Deuteronomy 14:7.
It is forbidden to eat any mammal that doesn't possess both kosher signs—split hooves and chewing cud.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Non-Kosher Mammals
Negative Commandment 172
Translated by Berel Bell
The 172nd prohibition is that we are forbidden eating from a non-kosher beheimah or chaya.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,1 "Among the animals that bring up their cud...there are some that you may not eat. These include the camel, the hare, the hyrax...and the pig."
Other non-kosher animals, however, are not listed explicitly; it is from the verse,2 "This you may eat every animal that has a true hoof...and which brings up its cud" that we know that without both these signs together, it may not be eaten. However, it is a prohibition which is implied from a positive commandment, which, as we have explained, is counted as a positive commandment. The general principle is that a prohibition which is implied from a positive commandment is counted as a positive commandment, and one is not punished by lashes.
However, from a kal va'chomer3 we learn that there is a direct prohibition against eating other non-kosher beheimos and chayos, and that one who does so incurs lashes. [The kal va'chomer is:] If one receives lashes for eating a pig or a camel, each of which has one sign of a kosher animal — certainly one receives lashes for eating another animal which has no kosher sign whatsoever.
Listen to what the Sifra says about this subject: "The verse 'This you may eat,' teaches that only that kind may you eat, and you may not eat one which is non-kosher. This teaches us the positive commandment; what is the source of the prohibition? The verse,4 'These are the ones that you may not eat from among the cud-chewing [hoofed animals: the camel... the hyrax...the hare...the pig...].' This teaches only these particular species; what is the source for other non-kosher species? It is a logical inference: 'if there is a prohibition against eating these animals, which have one sign of being kosher, certainly there is a prohibition against eating other animals which have no kosher sign whatsoever.'
"In summary, the camel, hare, hyrax and pig are prohibited by an explicit verse, and the other non-kosher animals are prohibited by a kal va'chomer. Therefore the positive commandment is derived from the verse, and the prohibition from a kal va'chomer. This kal va'chomer, however, is to reveal the existing law, as we explained regarding [the prohibition of incest with] a daughter," as explained in the appropriate place.5
Therefore, one who eats a kezayis of meat from any species of non-kosher beheimah or chaya receives lashes by Biblical law. Keep this in mind.
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 14:7-8.
2.Ibid. 14:6.
3.One of the 13 rules of Torah interpretation, that one can generalize from a less obvious case to a more obvious one.
4.Lev. 11:4.
5.N336. The Torah lists a grand-daughter among the incestual prohibitions, but not a daughter.
In the Second Introductory Principle, the Rambam explains that laws which are derived through the 13 rules of Torah interpretation are not included in the count of 613 mitzvos. Nevertheless, sometimes the law is not actually "derived" from the rule, but the law has been passed down orally as one of the 613, and is only "revealed" through the rule. In such cases, the law is included in the count of 613.
Although both these laws are derived from the principle of
--------------------------------------Negative Commandment 174
Non-Kosher Birds
"And these you shall detest among the birds, they shall not be eaten"—Leviticus 11:13.
It is forbidden to eat any non-kosher bird.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Non-Kosher Birds
Negative Commandment 174
Translated by Berel Bell
The 174th prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating a non-kosher bird.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement regarding those species,1 "These are the flying animals that you must avoid. Do not eat [the following:]. "
One who eats a kezayis of their meat also receives lashes.
The details of this mitzvah — along with the previous two2 — are explained in the third chapter of Chullin.3
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 11:13.
2.N172 and N173.
3.59a.
-------------------------------------
• 1 Chapter: Shemita Shemita - Chapter 7 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Shemita - Chapter 7
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Shemita - Chapter 7
Halacha 1
We may only partake of the produce of the Sabbatical year as long as that species is found in the field. [This is derived from Leviticus 25:7]: "For the animal and the beast in your land will be all the produce to eat." [Implied1 is that] as long as a beast2 [can be] eating from this species in the field, one may eat from [what he has collected] at home. When there is no longer any [of that species] for the beast to eat in the field, one is obligated to remove that species from his home. This is the obligation of biyur which applies to the produce of the Sabbatical year.
Halacha 2
What is implied? If a person has dried figs at home, he may partake of them as long as there are figs on the trees in the field. When there are no longer figs in the field, it is forbidden for him to partake of the figs he has at home and he must instead remove them.3
Halacha 3
If he had a large amount of produce, he should distribute4 a quantity that can be eaten in three meals to every person [he desires]. It is forbidden - both for the rich and the poor5 - to partake of it after the time of biyur. If he is not able to find people to eat at the time of biyur, he should burn it with fire or cast it into Mediterranean Sea,6 or destroy it through any other means.7
Halacha 4
If one had raisins from the Sabbatical year and there were no longer any grapes left in the fields,8 the gardens, and the orchards which are ownerless,9even though there are still grapes on the vines in the courtyards, he may not partake of the raisins because of the grapes in the courtyard, because they are not accessible to a wild beast.10 If, however, there are very firm grapes that do not mature until the end of the year [still growing in the field], one may partake of the raisins [he has stored] because of them. Similar laws apply in all analogous instances.
Halacha 5
When a tree produces fruit twice a year and one still possesses fruit from its first crop, he may partake of it as long as the second crop is still in the field. For [the requirement that] this species be [available] in the field [is met]. We do not, however, [continue to] partake [of stored fruit] because of fruit that grows in the fall,11 because it is considered as the produce of a different year.
Halacha 6
When a person pickles three types of produce in one barrel, if one of these types of produce is no longer available in the field, that type of produce should be removed from the barrel.12 If he began partaking of [the pickled produce], the entire [mixture] is considered as having been removed.13
Just as one is obligated to remove food [stored for] human consumption, so too, must he remove animal fodder from his home and he may no longer feed it to an animal if that type of produce is no longer available in the field.14
Halacha 7
Just as one must remove the produce of the Sabbatical year, so too, one must remove the money [received in exchange for it].15 What is implied? One sold pomegranates of the Sabbatical year and used the money received in return for them [to purchase] food. When there are no longer any pomegranates on the trees in the field, but he remains in possession of the money he received for selling them, he is obligated to remove it from his possession.
Halacha 8
What should he do? He should purchase food with this money and distribute it, [providing] three meals to every person [he desires].16 Alternatively, if he does not find people to partake of such food, he should cast the money into the Mediterranean Sea.
Halacha 9
[Eretz Yisrael is divided into] three lands [with regard to the obligation of]biyur:17
a) the entire land of Yehudah, its mountainous portion, its plain, and its valley, is all one region.18
b) the entire [West] Bank of the Jordan,19 [including] the plain of Lod, the mountains [around] the plain of Lod, [the area of] Beit Choron, with the sea, is all one region; and
c) the entire Galilee, the upper [Galilee], the lower [Galilee], and the area of Tiberias, is one region. In each of these three regions, one may partake [of a species of produce stored at home] until the last [traces of that produce] cease [to exist in the entire region's fields].
Halacha 10
What is implied? If one possesses produce in the land of Yehudah, one may partake of it as long as this species is found [in the fields of] the entire land of Yehudah.20Similar laws apply if he possesses produce from the Galilee or from the [West] Bank of the Jordan.
Halacha 11
These three regions are considered as one entity with regard to carobs, olives, and dates.21 One may eat dates [throughout Eretz Yisrael] until the last dates are no longer available in Tzo'ar.22 From when are they no longer available? Purim. We may eat olives until Shavuot and grapes until Pesach of the eighth year. Dried figs may be eaten until Chanukah.23
Halacha 12
When a person transports produce of the Sabbatical year from a region in which it is no longer available [in the field] to a region where it is available, or from a region where it is available to a region in which it is no longer available, he is obligated in biyur. [The rationale is that] we place upon him the stringencies of the place from which he departed and those of the place to which he journeyed.24
When the produce of Eretz Yisrael has been brought to the Diaspora, it should be destroyed in its place.25 It should not be transported from one place to another.
Halacha 13
A great general principle was stated with regard to [the produce of] the Sabbatical year: Whenever [produce] is [used as] food for humans, animal fodder, or as one of the dyes, if it will not be maintained in the earth, the laws of the Sabbatical year apply to it and to money received for it and the requirements of biyur apply to it26 and to money received for it, e.g., the leaves of wild onions, mint, and endives, are considered as food for humans, brambles and thorn are considered as animal fodder, and woad27 and safflower are considered as dyes. If the species is maintained in the earth, e.g., madder28 and dyer's rocket from the dyes,29 even though the laws of the Sabbatical year apply to it and to money received for it. The requirements ofbiyur do not apply to it or to money received for it, because it is maintained in the earth.30 Instead, one may benefit from it and use it as dye until Rosh HaShanah.31
Halacha 14
Whenever a plant is not set aside to be [used as] food for humans, animal fodder, or as one of the dyes, since it is not used as kindling fuel,32 the laws of the Sabbatical year apply to it and to money received for it,33 but the requirements of biyur do not apply to it34 or to those monies. [This applies] even if it will not be maintained in the earth. Instead, we may benefit from it and the money received for it until Rosh HaShanah.35 Examples [of this category include] the roots of wild onions and mint and the scorpion-like herb.
Halacha 15
The laws of the Sabbatical year apply to the peels and the buds of pomegranates, the shells of nuts,36 and the seeds [of other fruits] and to the money received for them,37 but the requirements of biyur do not apply to them or to those monies.
The laws of the Sabbatical year apply to the tips of the branches of grape vines38 and carob trees and to the money received for them, as do the requirements of biyur.39 The laws of the Sabbatical year apply to the tips of the branches of the evergreen oak, the pistachio tree, and the box thorn bush40 and to the money received for them, but the requirements of biyur do not apply to them.41 The requirement of biyur does apply to their leaves.42
Halacha 16
When is the time for biyur? For leaves, it is when they wither and fall from the tree.43 The leaves of olive trees, reeds, and carob trees do not have a time ofbiyur, because they never wither and fall away.
Halacha 17
Halacha 18
Halacha 19
The laws of the Sabbatical year apply to roses, cloves, and chestnuts and to the money received for them.51 The laws of the Sabbatical year do not apply to balsam sap that flows from trees, from their leaves, and their roots.52 They do apply to [sap] that flows from underdeveloped berries53 and the money received for it.
Halacha 20
When does the above apply? When the tree produces edible fruit. If, however, the tree is not fruitbearing, the sap that flows from its leaves and roots is considered as its fruit54 and the laws of the Sabbatical year apply to it and to the money received for it.
Halacha 21
When a person pickles a rose from the Sabbatical year in the oil of the sixth year, he may gather the rose55 and it is permitted [to use] the oil [in an ordinary manner].56 If he pickles [a rose] in the oil of the eighth year,57 he is obligated to perform biyur with the oil. [The rationale is] at that time, the rose is dry and the obligation of biyur has already fallen upon it.
Halacha 22
When carobs of the Sabbatical year were left to soak in the wine of the sixth year or in the wine of the eighth year, biyur must be performed with the wine, because it has absorbed the flavor of the produce of the Sabbatical year.58This is the general principle: When the produce of the Sabbatical year becomes mixed with other produce of the same species,59 even the slightest amount [causes the entire mixture to be considered as the produce of the Sabbatical year]. When it becomes mixed with other species, [the ruling depends on whether it has] imparted its flavor [or not].60
FOOTNOTES
1.
See the Sifra to that verse.
From the fact that a verse from the Torah is brought as support, the Minchat Chinuchconcludes that the obligation of biyur is of Scriptural origin. The P'nei Yehoshua(Pesachim 52b), however, maintains that the verse is merely an asmachta, a support brought by the Rabbis for their own ordinance, and in truth, the obligation is Rabbinic. He supports this thesis by the fact that, otherwise, it would have been appropriate for the Rambam to consider the obligation as one of the mitzvot.
2.
I.e., a wild animal which you are not obligated to feed. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Shivi'it 9:2).
3.
As the Rambam states in the following halachah.
4.
On the day of the biyur.
5.
There is a difference of opinion concerning this matter in the mishnah (Sh'vi'it 5:3, 9:8).
6.
This is how the Rambam [in the conclusion of his Commentary to the Mishnah, et al], interprets the phrase yam hamelech. See also Hilchot Ma'aser Sheni 2:2. Others interpret it as referring to the Dead Sea. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 9:2), he mentions only casting the produce into the sea.
7.
Thus the Rambam interprets the word biyuras meaning "destruction." After the time ofbiyur, the produce must be destroyed. The Ramban (in his commentary to the Torah) and other Rishonim, however, interpret it as "removal" and maintain that after the biyur, all that is necessary is to renounce one's ownership over the produce and thus remove it from one's domain. Rav Yosef Corcus states that this view can be relied upon in the present era and, indeed, this is the practice in Eretz Yisrael today.
8.
In a later addition to his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 9:4; see Rav Kappach's notes), the Rambam states that fields within a city are considered like gardens. Here he is speaking of those in the outlying areas.
9.
I.e., regarded as ownerless in the Sabbatical year.
10.
I.e., a homeowner will not leave his courtyard open so that a wild beast can enter it at will. (He must, however, regard even the produce growing in his courtyard as ownerless and allow another person to enter and pick it.)
11.
Since this fruit grows in the rainy season, which begins well after Rosh HaShanah, it is considered as the produce of the eighth year and not of the Sabbatical year.
12.
And eaten or destroyed, as stated in Halachah 3. He is not, however, obligated to remove the other two types of produce. Although the one type of produce that is now forbidden has imparted its flavor to the other two types, that does not cause them to be forbidden.
13.
Our translation is based on the interpretation of Mareh HaPonim (a gloss to the Jerusalem Talmud, Sh'vi'it 9:5). He explains that once a jar of pickled vegetables were opened (in pre-refrigeration eras), the vegetables would spoil rapidly. Hence, it is considered as if the entire batch was already removed from his possession.
14.
In this context, there is no difference between the laws applying to food for humans and animal fodder.
15.
For as stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 6, the holiness of the produce is transferred to the money received for it.
16.
As above, these activities should be performed on the day the obligation of biyurtakes place. The Radbaz explains that the person is required to purchase food with the money. It is not sufficient for him to distribute the money itself and tell the recipients to purchase food, for perhaps they will fail to do so.
17.
I.e., as the Rambam proceeds to explain,Eretz Yisrael is not considered a single entity with regard to this obligation, for different conditions apply in each of the three regions. Each of those regions individually, however, is considered as a single integral entity although different conditions apply in each of its districts.
18.
I.e., this region - as well as the other two - is subdivided into three districts.
19.
The term Ever HaYarden, literally Trans-Jordan, is most commonly used to refer to the areas on the Eastern bank of the Jordan, as mentioned at the conclusion of the Book of Numbers, throughout the Book of Deuteronomy, and in many places throughout the Mishnah. There are many authorities (among them, Rabbenu Shimshon and Rabbenu Tam) who therefore consider that as the proper interpretation in this instance as well. In this instance, however, the Rambam understands the term differently. His view is accepted by Rabbenu Asher, Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura, and explained by Kaftor UPerach. See also the gloss of Rav Akiva Eiger.
20.
Even if it is no longer available in the particular district in which one is located. See Sh'vi'it 9:2-3.
21.
And one may eat these species in one region even though they are no longer available in that entire region, as long as they are available in other portions of Eretz Yisrael. Among the reasons given for the distinction between these species and other fruits is that there is little difference between the times these fruits grow in one region ofEretz Yisrael and another. Also, these species remain on the tree after they have ripened for longer than most fruits. Hence, there is added reason for seeking a common date.
22.
A village near Jericho, a region renown for its dates. They grow there later than in other places in Eretz Yisrael.
23.
The commentaries have questioned the Rambam's statements with regard to figs and grapes, for they imply that there is a universal time for the biyur of these species and yet they are not mentioned together with the three species at the beginning of the halachah. The Radbaz resolves this question by saying that the dates mentioned by the Rambam are the latest applicable in all of the three regions.
24.
This is a general principle applied in several different contexts in Torah law to maintain unity within the Jewish community; seeHilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 8:20. With regard to the matter at hand, since the obligation ofbiyur has already taken effect in one of these regions, he is obligated to observe it.
25.
I.e., it need not be brought back to Eretz Yisrael to be destroyed there as required by one opinion in Sh'vi'it 6:5. As stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 13, as an initial preference, the produce of the Sabbatical year should not be brought to the Diaspora.
26.
For it is maintained in the earth only for a specific time.
27.
Which produces a bluish dye.
28.
Which produces a red dye.
29.
The Rambam does not mention food for human's or animal fodder, for all species of these types of produce reach a point where they are no longer available in the field and the obligation of biyur takes effect at that time.
30.
And thus is continually available to an animal.
31.
I.e., until the end of the Sabbatical year. Some commentaries maintain that the text should read "after Rosh HaShanah," for the plants that grew in the Sabbatical year will continue growing into the eighth year. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 7:2), the Rambam states: "We continue to use them and benefit from them until they cease [growing in the field]." The Radbaz follows this understanding, but maintains that after Rosh HaShanah, these plants should be declared ownerless. That fulfills the requirement of biyur with regard to them.
32.
The laws of the Sabbatical year do not apply to kindling fuel, as stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 21.
33.
Since a person has chosen to benefit from it, he must treat it as the produce of the Sabbatical year.
34.
Since it is not considered as food or animal fodder, there is no limit until when it would normally be used.
35.
The Rambam does not mention food for human's or animal fodder, for all species of these types of produce reach a point where they are no longer available in the field and the obligation of biyur takes effect at that time.
36.
The Radbaz maintains that this refers to the inner shell which is useful as a dye. The hard outer shell, by contrast, is useful only for kindling and the laws of the Sabbatical year do not apply to it.
37.
For they are useful as dyes (Radbaz).
38.
When these branches are soft, they are occasionally cut off, pickled, and served as food [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 7:5)].
39.
The requirements of biyur apply, because the tips of these branches will ultimately fall from the tree (Radbaz).
40.
Apparently, these branches are also pickled on occasion.
41.
From the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.), it would appear that the rationale is that these branches continue growing on the tree.
42.
Because they fall from the branches and thus are not maintained in the earth (ibid.).
43.
For at this point, they are no longer accessible to an animal in the field.
44.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 3:1)]. There he explains that although matok, the name the Mishnah uses, means "sweet," this fruit has a bitter taste and that term is used as a euphemism. Some have identified this species with the colocynth, a wild gourd with a very bitter flavor. The Radbaz identifies it with a bitter species of grass.
45.
When these gourds have dried, fresh grass will no longer be available in the field for animals.
46.
For animal fodder.
47.
For the rains will spoil the grasses and they will no longer be available in the fields (Radbaz). In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 9:6), the Rambam explains that these rains usually come between the seventeenth of MarCheshvan and the first of Kislev.
48.
Or for that matter the rich, for everyone is allowed to gather the fruit of the Sabbatical year (Radbaz).
49.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it9:7), the Rambam explains that this concept also applies to the poor gathering the presents of leket, shichachah, and pe'ah in other years.
50.
From this point on, there are no longer fruits available in the fields.
51.
For these are all considered as fruit.
52.
Because this sap does not come from the fruit of the tree, but from the tree itself.
53.
For these are fruit.
54.
For this is its sole product.
55.
And treat it with the holiness of the Sabbatical year.
56.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it7:7), the Rambam explains that since the oil is aged and the rose is fresh, the oil will not absorb the flavor of the rose unless it is left within it for a long time. Accordingly, the oil is considered as the produce of the sixth year.
57.
Since the rose is aged, its flavor will be absorbed by the oil immediately (ibid.).
58.
The wine absorbs the carobs' flavor immediately (ibid.).
59.
E.g., the wine of the Sabbatical year with the wine of other years (ibid.).
60.
If it has imparted its flavor to the mixture, the mixture must be treated as produce of the Sabbatical year. If it has not, those stringencies do not apply. The concept stated here is a general principle applying in other contexts. See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 15:8.
---------------------
• 3 Chapters: Ma'achalot Assurot Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 2, Ma'achalot Assurot Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 3, Ma'achalot Assurot Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 4 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 2
Audio: Listen | Download• Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 2
Halacha 1
Since it is written [Deuteronomy 14:6]: "Any animal that has split hooves, [whose foot] is divided into two hoofs and chews the cud, [this may you eat],"1one may derive that any animal that does not chew its cud and have split hoofs is forbidden. A negative commandment that comes as a result of a positive commandment is considered as a positive commandment.2
With regard to the camel, the pig, the rabbit, and the hare, [Leviticus 11:4]3states: "These you may not eat from those which chew the cud and have split hoofs." From this, you see that they are forbidden by a negative commandment, even though they possess one sign of kashrut. Certainly, this applies to other non-kosher domesticated animals and wild beasts that do not have any signs of kashrut.4 The prohibition against eating them involves a negative commandment in addition to the positive commandment that is derived from "This may you eat."
Halacha 2
Therefore anyone who eats an olive sized portion5 of the meat of a non-kosher domesticated animal or wild beasts is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law. This applies whether he partook of the meat or the fat. For the Torah did not distinguish between the meat and fat of non-kosher animals.6
Halacha 3
With regard to humans: Although [Genesis 2:7] states: "And the man became a beast with a soul," he is not included in the category of hoofed animals. Therefore, he is not included in the [above] prohibition.7 Accordingly, one who partakes of meat or fat from a man - whether alive or deceased - is not liable for lashes. It is, however, forbidden [to partake of human meat] because of the positive commandment [mentioned above].8 For the Torah [Leviticus 11:2] lists the seven species of kosher wild beasts and says: "These are the beasts of which you may partake." Implied is that any other than they may not be eaten. And a negative commandment that comes as a result of a positive commandment is considered as a positive commandment.
Halacha 4
When one partakes of an olive-sized portion of a non-kosher fowl, he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, as [Leviticus 11:13] states: "These shall you detest from the fowl. You shall not partake of them." And he violates a positive commandment, as [Deuteronomy 14:11] states: "You may partake of all kosher fowl." Implied is that the non-kosher may not be eaten.
Anyone who partakes of an olive-sized portion of a non-kosher fish is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, as [Leviticus 11:11] states: "They shall be detestable for you. Do not partake of their meat." And he violates a positive commandment, as [Deuteronomy 14:9] states: "All that possess fins and scales, you may eat." Implied is that those that do not possess fins and scales may not be eaten. We thus learn that anyone who partakes of a non-kosher fish, domesticated animal, wild beast, or fowl nullified a positive commandment and violated a negative commandment.9
Halacha 5
A non-kosher locust is included among [the category of] flying teeming animals.10 One who partakes of an olive-sized portion11 of flying teeming animals is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, as [Deuteronomy 14:19] states: "All flying teeming animals are non-kosher for you. They may not be eaten."12
What is meant by a flying teeming animal? For example, a fly, a mosquito, a hornet, a bee, or the like.
Halacha 6
When one partakes of an olive-sized portion of a teeming animal of the land, he is liable for lashes, as [Leviticus 11:41] states: "Any teeming animal that swarms on the ground is detestable to you. It should not be eaten."13
What is meant by a teeming animal of the land? Snakes, scorpions, beetles, centipedes, and the like.
Halacha 7
The eight teeming animals that are mentioned in the Torah14 are: the weasel, the mouse, the ferret, the hedgehog, the chameleon, the lizard, the snail, and the mole. A person who eats a lentil-sized portion of their meat is liable for lashes. The minimum measure that one is prohibited to partake of their meat is the same as the minimum measure that conveys ritual impurity. They all may be combined together to reach the measure of a lentil.
Halacha 8
When does the above apply? When one partakes of them after they have died.15 If, however, one cuts off a limb from a living creature from one of these species and eats it, he does not receive lashes unless he [partakes of] an olive-sized portion of meat. They all may be combined together to reach the measure of an olive.
One who eats an entire limb of a teeming animal after it dies does not receive lashes unless it contains a lentil-sized amount of meat.16
Halacha 9
The blood of these eight teeming animals and their flesh can be combined to reach the minimum measure of a lentil, provided the blood is still attached to their flesh.17 Similarly, the blood of a snake18 is combined with its flesh to reach the measure of an olive and one receives lashes for it. The rationale is that its flesh is not separate from its blood, even though it does not impart ritual impurity.19 Similar concepts apply with regard to other teeming animals that do not convey ritual impurity.
Halacha 10
When a person collects the blood of teeming animals that has been separated [from their bodies] and partakes of it, he receives lashes if he partakes of a portion the size of an olive.20 [This applies] provided he was warned against partaking of it because [of the prohibition against partaking of] a teeming animal. If, however, he is warned against partaking of it because [of the prohibition against partaking of] blood, he is not liable. For we are liable only for the blood of domesticated animals, wild beasts, and fowl.21
Halacha 11
All these measures - and the distinctions between them22 - are halachot received by Moses at Sinai [and transmitted via the Oral Tradition].
Halacha 12
One who partakes of an olive-sized portion of a aquatic teeming animal is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, as [Leviticus 11:43] states: "Do not make your souls detestable [by partaking] of any teeming animal that swarms... and do not become impure because of them." Included in this prohibition are teeming animals of the land, that fly, and of the water.23
What is meant by a aquatic teeming animal? Both small creatures like worms and leeches that inhabit the water24 and larger creatures that are beasts of the sea. To state a general principle: Any aquatic creature that does not have the characteristics of a fish, neither a non-kosher fish or a kosher fish, e.g., a seal, a dolphin, a frog, or the like.
Halacha 13
The species that come into existence in garbage heaps and the carcasses of dead animals, e.g., maggots, worms, and the like which are not brought into being from male-female [relations],25 but from filth that decays and the like are called "those which creep on the earth." A person who partakes of an olive-sized portion [of these creations] is liable for lashes,26 as [Leviticus 11:44] states: "Do not make your souls impure with any teeming animal that creeps on the earth," even thought they do not reproduce. Teeming animals that swarm on the earth, by contrast, are those that reproduce from male-female [relations].
Halacha 14
[The following laws apply with regard to] species that come into being from fruits and other foods.27 Should they depart from [the source from where they came into being] and go to the earth,28 a person who partakes of an olive-sized portion of them is liable for lashes,29 as [Leviticus 11:42] states: "With regard to any teeming animal that swarms on the earth, [do not eat them]." This forbids those that departed to the earth, even though they returned to the food. If, however, they did not depart, it is permitted to eat the fruit together with the worm in it.
Halacha 15
When does the above apply? When the food became worm-ridden after it was uprooted from the earth.30 If, however, it became worm-ridden while it was connected [to its source of nurture], that worm is forbidden as if it became departed to the earth. For it was created on the earth. One is liable for lashes [for partaking of it]. If there is a doubt, it is forbidden.
Therefore all fruits that commonly become worm-ridden31 when connected [to their source of nurture] should not be eaten until one checks the fruit from its inside,32 for perhaps it contains a worm. If the fruit remains twelve months after being severed [from its source], it may be eaten without being inspected. For a worm inside of it will not endure for twelve months.33
Halacha 16
If [the worm] departed to the atmosphere, but did not reach the earth, or only a portion of it reached the earth, it departed after it died, the worm was found on the seed on the inside, or it departed from one food to another, [in] all these [situations, the worm] is forbidden because of the doubt, but lashes are not administered [if one partakes of it].
Halacha 17
A worm found in the stomach of a fish, in the brain within the head of an animal, and one found in meat are forbidden. When, however, salted fish becomes worm-ridden, the worms in it are permitted.34 This is comparable to fruit which has become worm-ridden after it has been separated from the earth. It is permitted to eat them together with the worm that is in them.
Similarly, if water35 in a utensil produces teeming animals, those teeming animals are permitted to be drunken together with the water, as [can be inferred from Leviticus 11:9]: "All that possess fins and scales in the water, seas, and rivers, they you may eat." Implied is that you may eat those that possess [fins and scales] in the water, seas, and rivers and those that do not possess them, you may not eat. But those creatures [that come into existences] in utensils are permitted whether they possess [fins and scales] or not.
Halacha 18
[Since the water found] in cisterns, trenches and caves is not flowing water, but instead is collected there,36 it is comparable to water found in containers. [Hence], aquatic teeming animals that are created [in these places] are permitted. A person may bend down and drink37 without holding back even though he swallows these flimsy teeming animals when drinking.38
Halacha 19
When does the above apply? When the teeming animals did not depart from the place where they came into being. If they did, even though they later return to the container or the cistern, they are forbidden. If they went out to the walls of the barrel and then fell back into the water or the beer, they are permitted.39 Similarly, if they went out to the walls of the cistern and the cave and returned to the water, they are permitted.
Halacha 20
When a person strains wine, vinegar, or beer and eats the insects, bugs, and worms that he strains, he is liable for lashes for partaking of an aquatic teeming animal or [for partaking of] a flying teeming animal and an aquatic teeming animal.40 [This applies] even if they returned to the container after they were strained, for they departed from the place where they came into existence. If, however, they did not depart, one may drink without holding back, as we explained.41
Halacha 21
When, in this chapter, we have spoken about partaking of an olive-sized portion, [the intent is that] one ate an olive-sized portion of a large creature or one collected some from one species and some from another similar species42 until one partakes of an olive sized portion. If, however, one eats an entire forbidden creature by itself, one is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law even if it is smaller than a mustard seed.43
[This applies] whether one partook of it after it died or while it was alive. Even if the creature decayed and lost its form,44 one is liable for lashes since one consumed it in its entirety.
Halacha 22
Halacha 23
[The following laws apply if] a particular creature is [included in the categories of] a flying teeming animal, an aquatic teeming animal, and a teeming animal of the earth, e.g., it has wings, it walks on the earth like other [earthbound] teeming animals, and it reproduces in the water. If one partakes of it, he is liable for three [sets of] lashes.47
If, in addition to the above, it is one of the species which are brought into being in the earth in fruit, he is liable for a fourth [set of] lashes. If it is one of the species that reproduce,48 he is liable for a fifth [set of] lashes. If it also can be considered as a non-kosher fowl in addition to being considered a flying teeming animal,49 he is liable for six [sets of] lashes: [for partaking of] a non-kosher fowl, a flying teeming animal, a teeming animal of the earth, an aquatic teeming animal, an animal that swarms on the earth, and a worm from fruit.
[This applies whether] he partook of the entire creature or he partook of an olive-sized portion of it. Therefore one who eats an ant that flies that breeds in the water is liable for five [sets of] lashes.
Halacha 24
When one crushed ants, added another complete ant to those that were crushed so that the entire quantity was equal to an olive-sized portion, and partook of it, he is liable for six [sets of] lashes: five [for partaking of] the one ant50 and an additional one, because he partook of an olive-sized portion of dead non-kosher animals.51
FOOTNOTES
1.
Similar verses are also stated in that passage with regard to fish, fowl, and locusts. Like verses are also stated in Leviticus, except that in Leviticus, there is no such commandment with regard to a kosher fowl. To include that as well, the Rambam refers to the passage in Deuteronomy.
2.
I.e., it does not have the severity of a negative commandment. Hence its violation is not punishable by lashes.
The Rambam is explaining that the Torah is not commanding us to eat kosher species, for there is no obligation to partake of them. Instead, it is commanding us to take precautions - through checking distinguishing signs - against partaking of non-kosher ones. See Sefer HaMitzvot(General Principle 6) where the Rambam elaborates in the explanation of the concept of a prohibition derived from a positive commandment. See also Chapter 1, Halachah 1, and notes which deals with this issue.
3.
Here the Rambam cites the verses from Leviticus - although like verses also appear in Deuteronomy - for Leviticus comes first in the Torah.
4.
The commentaries have raised a question concerning the Rambam's statements. There is a general principle (Pesachim 24a,et al): "We do not issue a warning on the basis of logical deduction." Implied is that a person is not given lashes when a prohibition is not explicitly mentioned in the Torah, but instead derived through logic. Why then, these commentaries ask, are lashes given for partaking of non-kosher species other than the four mentioned specifically by the Torah?
The Rambam offers a resolution to this question in his Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 172). There he explains that in this instance, we are not deriving the prohibition on the basis of logic, for it is already stated in the positive commandment. We are using logic only to derive that this prohibition is also included in the negative commandment.
5.
Approximately, an ounce in contemporary measure.
6.
Such a distinction is made with regard to the meat and fat of kosher animals. With regard to non-kosher animals, by contrast, the two are included in the same category and the same prohibition applies to both of them.
7.
For the prohibition mentions the animal's hoofs.
8.
The Ra'avad and the Rashba differ with the Rambam's ruling, maintaining that there is no prohibition at all against partaking of meat from a human. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah80:1) follows the Rambam's ruling.
The Maggid Mishneh explains the Rambam's position, noting that - as stated in Chapter 3, Halachah 2, and in Chapter 6, Halachot 1-2 - there is no Scriptural prohibition against partaking of milk and blood from a human. Now these leniencies are derived from the exegesis of verses from the Torah. Were the meat of a human not to be forbidden, why would it be necessary to teach that his milk and blood are permitted? Who would have thought otherwise?
9.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 172, 173, 174) and Sefer HaChinuch(mitzvot 154, 156, 157) include these among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
10.
I.e., there is no separate commandment not to partake of a non-kosher locust. Instead, this is included in the general prohibition against partaking of non-kosher teeming animals. The Lechem Mishneh and others note that, in contrast, to the previous halachot, the Rambam does not mention the fact that there is a prohibition against partaking of locusts that results from the positive commandment to partake of them.
11.
Or an entire teeming animal even if it is smaller than an olive; see Halachah 21.
12.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 175) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 471) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
As explained in the halachot that follow and summarized in Halachah 23, there are five prohibitions in the Torah that refer to teeming animals. The categories are not mutually exclusive and it is possible that one particular creature may be included in several - or all - of these categories.
13.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 176) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 162) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
14.
Leviticus 11:29-30. The translation of the names of these eight species is a matter of debate among both Torah commentaries and zoologists. Our translation is taken from Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's Living Torah. Consult the notes there for a detailed discussion of the matter.
The Torah singles these teeming animals out from others and states that they convey ritual purity. It does not mention anything about them with regard to the prohibition against partaking of their flesh. Nevertheless, since this quantity of their flesh is significant in another halachic context, it is also considered significant with regard to this prohibition (Meilah 16b). This explains why the minimum measure for which they are liable is less than that associated with other prohibitions.
15.
For their flesh only conveys ritual impurity after they have died.
16.
Hilchot Shaar Avot HaTumah 4:3 states that there is no minimum measure with regard to the limbs of a teeming animal within the context of ritual impurity. A person who touches an entire limb of a such an animal after its death becomes impure even if the limb is smaller than the size of a lentil. Nevertheless, we do not rule that one is liable if he eats such a limb.
Meilah, loc. cit., explains that although the limbs of other animals also convey ritual impurity no matter what their size, one is not liable unless he partakes of an olive-sized portion. Hence, there is no reason to extend the stringency that applies with regard to these teeming animals any further.
17.
If not, one is not liable until he partakes of an olive-sized portion, as stated in the following halachah.
18.
Which is not one of the teeming animals explicitly mentioned by the Torah.
19.
In contrast to the blood of the eight teeming animals that were singled out by the Torah.
20.
The Maggid Mishneh (in his gloss to Halachah 9) states that this applies even to the eight teeming animals mentioned explicitly in the Torah. Once their blood is separated from their bodies, the minimum measure is the same as that of other species.
21.
As stated in Chapter 6, Halachah 1.
22.
That for some one is liable for an olive-sized portion and for others, for a lentil-sized portion.
23.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 179) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 164) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. As obvious from the Rambam's words here and as explained in greater length in Sefer HaMitzvot, this is not a specific commandment relating to aquatic teeming creatures, but a general commandment relating to all teeming animals. Accordingly, when a person partakes of a teeming animal of the land or a flying teeming animal, he is liable for two transgressions.
The Ramban (Hasagot to Sefer HaMitzvot, General Principle 9) and the Maggid Mishneh differ with the Rambam and maintain that this is not considered as a separate mitzvah.
24.
See Halachot 18-19.
25.
The Rambam is stating - based on Midrashic and Talmudic sources - that there are creatures which spontaneously regenerate. It is not our place to defend these concepts against the findings of science. It must, however, be said that many Rabbinical leaders who are aware of the work of Pasteur and others did not doubt the teachings of the Torah and accepted these laws.
26.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 177) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 165) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
27.
See Halachot 18-19.
28.
The Rambam's wording is borrowed from the prooftext cited. Even if these crawling animals do not reach the earth, but merely appear on the surface of the fruit, they become forbidden., as stated in Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 178). Note, however, Halachah 16.
29.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 178) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 163) include this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
30.
Or removed from its tree.
31.
This is a halachic issue that is given much attention today. We find certain Jewish groups who have taken it upon themselves to grow vegetables without any exposure to insects. There is a heightened consciousness with regard to the need to check and many books and tools have been produced with this purpose in mind. It must be emphasized, however, that although there are no vegetables that are absolutely insect and larvae free, the common halachic approach is not to show concern for any insects and/or larvae that are not visible to the naked eye. Conversely, we assume that all insects we discover came from male-female relationships or came into being while the fruit was connected to its source and do not permit any because they might have come from the fruit itself after it was detached.
32.
I.e., an external search is not sufficient and one must cut the fruit or vegetable open and search from the inside.
33.
Since a crawling animal will not live for more than twelve months inside produce and the produce has been detached for more than twelve months, it follows that the animal came into being from the produce itself and thus the produce and the animal can be eaten together.
Nevertheless, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 84:8) states that the produce should be checked lest there be crawling animals that have left the produce. One of the ways to select grains, legumes, and the like is to soak them first. Any ones with holes will float to the top. They should be discarded, lest they be worm-ridden.
34.
Provided they have not departed from the fish itself (Maggid Mishneh).
The Maggid Mishneh explains the Rambam's approach as follows: All worms that are found in both meat and fish while the animals are alive are forbidden, for we assume that they entered from the outside. Even after a fish dies, we can assume that the worms in its stomach were swallowed when it was alive. Similarly, those in an animal's brain can be assumed to have entered its nose from the outside and are hence, forbidden. Those found in the body of a fish are considered to have been spontaneously generated are hence permitted. Those found in the meat of an animal are not permitted. The rationale is that anything that comes from an animal is permitted to be eaten only after it has been slaughtered according to law. Even though the animal itself was slaughtered, since that slaughter preceded the existence of the worms, they are not permitted.
The Ra'avad and many other Rishonim differ with the Rambam's understanding and permit worms that came into being in meat from animals that were ritually slaughtered, e.g., in meat that was salted to be used at a later time. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah84:16) quotes both views, but appears to favor the more lenient one. The Rama states that it is customary to follow the more lenient view. In practice, in the present age, this problem is far less prevalent, for because of refrigeration and freezing, it is less likely for worms to exist in meat.
35.
Or other beverages (Siftei Cohen 84:1). This is evident from Halachot 19-20.
36.
I.e., water that is stored in storage compartments dug into - or naturally found within - the earth.
The Maggid Mishneh states that irrigation ditches and breeding ponds which water flows through are not included in this category, because - in contrast to water found in containers - the water in them does not stand still. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 84:1) quotes a difference of opinion on this issue.
37.
Commenting on the citation of this ruling by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 84:2), the Rama states that if one finds worms in a bucket of water drawn from such bodies, the worms are forbidden, because we fear that the worms came from the bucket and not from the water.
38.
Or other beverages (Siftei Cohen 84:1). This is evident from Halachot 19-20.
39.
For the walls are still considered as "the place where the teeming animals came into existence."
40.
If the insect has the characteristics of both the prohibited species, as stated in Halachah 23.
41.
Halachah 18. I.e., he need not worry that perhaps they became separated (Maggid Mishneh).
42.
For the portions of forbidden insects to be combined, they need not be of the same species. They must, however, be included in the same prohibition. See Chapter 4, Halachah 17.
43.
This is a general principle applying in many contexts in the laws of kashrut. The creature must, however, be visible to the naked eye.
44.
If, however, it has decayed to the extent that it is no longer fit for human consumption, one is not liable, as stated in Chapter 14, Halachah 11.
45.
For it is no longer considered as a complete creation.
46.
This phrase refers to the previous halachah.
47.
The Rambam's statements are based onMakkot 16b: "If one eats a potisa, one is liable for four [sets of] lashes, an ant, five [sets of] lashes." As he explains in Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 179), the intent is not that one is liable for additional sets of lashes because several prohibitions are stated with regard to a particular creature. Instead, the intent is that if one creature falls into several forbidden categories, one is liable for a set of lashes for every forbidden category. See Maggid Mishneh.
It must be emphasized that the Ra'avad, Rav Moshe HaCohen, the Ramban, and other Rishonim do not accept the Rambam's interpretation and instead, maintain that the prohibitions mentioned in Makkot, loc. cit., refer to the repetition of prohibitions concerning a single creature.
48.
I.e., although this particular creature was spontaneously generated, it was brought into being in a manner that it could reproduce and bear offspring.
49.
In Sefer HaMitzvot (loc. cit.), the Rambam is sensitive to the question that might arise and states: "Do not wonder how it is possible for a fowl to come into being from the decay of fruits, for we have seen this take place frequently." In that source, he also explains that it is possible for a single creature to have the characteristics of a non-kosher fowl and a flying teeming animal.
50.
As stated in the previous halachah.
51.
The Rambam is not referring to the prohibition against partaking of an animal that is not ritually slaughtered. For that prohibition applies only with regard to kosher animals, as stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 2. For this reason, the Maggid Mishneh (in his gloss to that halachah) raises questions with the Rambam's statement here. The Kessef Mishneh and others attempt to offer resolutions.
Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 3
Halacha 1
Any food that is produced from forbidden species for which lashes are given for partaking of1 is forbidden to be eaten according to Scriptural Law, e.g., milk from a forbidden species of domesticated animal or wild beast or the eggs of a forbidden species of birds or fish. [This is derived from Leviticus 11:16 which mentions]: "the bat of the ostrich." [Our Sages2 commented:] "This refers to its egg." The same law applies to all species that are forbidden like an ostrich and all entities [that are produce] like eggs.
Halacha 2
Halacha 3
Honey produced by bees and hornets6 is permitted. [The rationale is that] it is not a product of their bodies. Instead, it is collected in their mouths from herbs and then expelled in their hive so that they will be able to partake of it in the rainy season.
Halacha 4
Although human milk is permitted, our Sages prohibited an adult to nurse from [a woman's] breasts. Instead, the woman should express it into a container7and the adult should partake of it. An adult who nurses from [a woman's] breast is like one who nurses from a teeming animal.8 He is given stripes for rebellious conduct.
Halacha 5
An infant may continue to nurse for even four or five years. If, however, he was weaned for three days or more in a state of health and not because of sickness, he should not be allowed to nurse again.9 [The above applies] provided he was weaned after 24 months. If he was weaned within that time, even if he was weaned for a month or two, it is permitted to have him nurse again until the conclusion of 24 months.10
Halacha 6
Although the milk of a non-kosher animal and the egg of a non-kosher fowl are forbidden according to Scriptural Law, [one is] not [liable for] lashes [for partaking of them. [This is derived from Leviticus 11:8] which states: "You may not eat from their flesh." [Implied is that] one is liable for lashes for [partaking of] their flesh, but is not liable for lashes for [partaking of] their eggs and milk. One who partakes [of these substances] is like one who eats half the minimum measure [of a forbidden substance]. This is forbidden according to Scriptural Law, but one is not liable for lashes. Instead, he receives stripes for rebellious conduct.11
Halacha 7
It appears to me that eating the eggs of non-kosher species of fish that are found in their bellies is comparable to eating the insides of the forbidden fish themselves12 and one is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law. Similarly, when a person partakes of the eggs of a non-kosher fowl that are hanging in a cluster without being separated from the mother's body or completed, he is liable for lashes as if he ate the insides of [the fowl itself].13
Halacha 8
When one partakes the egg of a non-kosher fowl inside of which an embryo has begun to take form, he is liable for eating a flying teeming animal.14If, however, one partakes of the egg of a kosher fowl inside of which an embryo has begun to take form, he is liable for stripes for rebellious conduct.15
Halacha 9
Halacha 10
When a chick is hatched, even if its eyes have not opened, it is permitted [to slaughter it and] eat it.20
Halacha 11
When a chick is hatched from an egg from a trefe fowl, it is permitted, for it is not from a non-kosher species.24 When there is an unresolved question whether a fowl is trefe or not, we retain25 all the eggs it lays in its first batch.26If it grows another batch and begins laying them, the first ones are permitted.27 For if it was trefe, it would no longer lay eggs. If it does not lay eggs, [the first batch] are forbidden.
Halacha 12
The milk of a non-kosher animal will not congeal and solidify as the milk of a kosher animal does. If the milk of a non-kosher animal is mixed together with the milk of a kosher animal, when the mixture is [set aside for cheese to be made], the kosher milk will solidify and the non-kosher milk will be expelled together with the whey of the cheese.
Halacha 13
Accordingly, logic would dictate that any milk found in the possession of a gentile is forbidden, lest the gentile have mixed the milk of a non-kosher animal with it. And the cheese of the gentiles should be permitted, for the milk of a non-kosher animal will not form cheese. Nevertheless, during the age of the Sages of the Mishnah, they issued a decree against gentile cheese and forbade it, lest they use the skin of the stomach of an animal they slaughtered - which is forbidden as a nevelah28 - to cause it to solidify.29
If one would say: The stomach skin is a very small entity when compared to the milk that it is used to solidify. Why is it not nullified because of its insignificant size?30 Because it is used as the catalyst to cause the cheese to curdle. Since the catalyst which causes it to curdle is forbidden, everything is forbidden, as will be explained.31
Halacha 14
[The following laws apply when] cheese is left to solidify with herbs or fruit juice, e.g., fig syrup, and it is apparent [that these substances were used for] the cheese. There are some of the Geonim who have ruled that it is forbidden, for [our Sages] already decreed that all the cheeses of gentiles are forbidden, whether they caused them to solidify with a forbidden entity or with a permitted entity.32This is a decree, [instituted] because they cause them to solidify using forbidden entities.
Halacha 15
When a person partakes of cheese from gentiles or milk that was milked by a gentile without a Jew observing him, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.33 With regard to butter produced by gentiles, some of the Geonimpermit it, for [our Sages] did not decree against butter and some of theGeonim forbid it,34 because of the drops of milk that remain in it. For the whey in the butter is not mixed with the butter35 so that it will be nullified because of its minimal quantity. And we suspect that any milk [from gentiles] is mixed with the milk of a non-kosher animal.
Halacha 16
It appears to me36 that if one purchased butter from gentiles and cooked it until the drops of milk in it disappeared, it is permitted.37 For if one will say that [drops of non-kosher milk] were mixed with the butter and it was all cooked together, they became insignificant because of the small quantity [involved].38When, however, the butter is cooked by gentiles themselves,39 it is forbidden because of the effusion of gentile [foods], as will be explained.40
Halacha 17
When a Jew sits near a herd belonging to a gentile and the gentile brings him milk from the herd, it is permitted [for him to partake of it] even though there are non-kosher animals in the herd. [This applies] even though he did not see him milk the animal, provided he could have seen him were he to stand.41[The rationale is that] the gentile is afraid to milk the non-kosher animal lest [the Jew] stand and see him.42
Halacha 18
When both of the ends of an egg are rounded, both are pointed, or the yolk is on the outside and the white is on the inside, it is certainly from a non-kosher species. If one end is pointed, the other rounded, and the white is on the outside and the yolk is on the inside, it is possible that it is the egg of a non-kosher species and it is possible that it is the egg of a kosher species.43Accordingly, the Jew should inquire of the Jewish44 hunter who sells them. If he tells him that they are from such-and-such a fowl and that this fowl is kosher, he may rely on him.45 If, however, he tells him that they are from a kosher fowl, but does not mention its name, he may not rely on him.46
Halacha 19
For this reason, we do not purchase eggs from gentiles unless one recognizes the eggs and can identify them as being from a particular kosher species of fowl.47 We do not suspect that they came from a fowl that wastrefe or nevelah.48 And we do not purchase an [unshelled and] stirred egg from a gentile at all.49
Halacha 20
The distinguishing signs of fish eggs are the same as those for fowl. When both of the ends of an egg are rounded or both are pointed, it is non-kosher. If one end is pointed and the other rounded, he should inquire of the Jew who sells them.50 If he tells him that he salted them51 and removed them from a kosher species,52 he may partake of them on the basis of his statements. If he tells him that they are kosher, he may not rely on him unless he is a person who has an established reputation for observance.
Halacha 21
Similarly, we may not purchase cheese and pieces of fish that do not have distinguishing signs except from a Jew who has an established reputation for observance. In Eretz Yisrael, at the time it was populated primarily by [observant] Jews,53 one could purchase these items from any Jew located there. And it is permitted to purchase milk from any Jew, anywhere.
Halacha 22
When a person pickles non-kosher fish, the brine produced is forbidden. The brine produced by non-kosher locusts, by contrast, is permitted, because they do not possess any moisture.54 Accordingly, we do not purchase brine from gentiles unless there is a kosher fish floating in it.55 Even one fish is sufficient.
Halacha 23
When a gentile brings a trough filled with open barrels of brine and there is a kosher fish in one of them, they are all permitted.56 If they are closed, one opens one and finds a kosher fish and one opens a second and finds a kosher fish, they are all permitted.57 [This applies] provided the head of the fish and its backbone are present so that it is recognizable that they are from a kosher species of fish.58
FOOTNOTES
1.
I.e., foods that are forbidden by a negative commandment.
2.
Chullin 64b. The term literally means "the daughter of the ostrich." Our Sages, however, expanded the interpretation of the term as the Rambam explains.
3.
I.e., even by an adult. Note, however, Halachah 4.
4.
Chapter 2, Halachah 3.
5.
Thus it does not contradict the general principle mentioned in the previous halachah.
6.
As the Maggid Mishneh mentions, there is a difference of opinion among the Sages inBechorot 7b whether the honey of hornets is forbidden. This difference of opinion is perpetuated among the later authorities. See the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 81:9).
7.
Or into a person's hands. She may not, however, express it into the person's mouth [the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 81:7)].
8.
The Ra'avad and the Turei Zahav 81:9 explains that these words of censure were issued because an observer might think that the milk of a non-kosher animal is also permitted.
9.
Needless to say, if there is a danger to the child's life, he may be allowed to nurse again regardless of the amount of time for which he had been weaned [the Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 81:7)].
10.
When an infant has never been weaned, he may continue past the 24 month limit as the Rambam states at the beginning of the halachah. If, however, he has been weaned, he is bound by this restriction [Beit Yosef(Yoreh De'ah 81)].
11.
See Chapter 4, Halachah 16, Hilchot Shivitat Esor 2:3, et al.
12.
For they are part of the fish's body and are not separated by a shell.
13.
For this instance as well, the eggs are not a distinct entity, but instead are considered part of the fowl's body. The Maggid Mishnehbrings proof of this concept from Chapter 9, Halachot 4-5, which states that it is forbidden to eat such eggs together with milk and from Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTumah 3:10 which states that they convey ritual impurity like the meat of the fowl itself.
14.
The embryo is not considered as a non-kosher fowl. Nevertheless, it is already a distinct entity. Hence it is considered as a non-kosher teeming animal. The Maggid Mishneh mentions that there are otherRishonim who do not accept the Rambam's position.
The Siftei Cohen 15:1 explains that while the embryo is within the egg, it has the characteristics of a teeming animal.
15.
From Chullin 64a, it appears that there is only a Rabbinic prohibition against partaking of this embryo. Hence, this punishment is given.
16.
This refers to an egg that could have been fertilized. If, however, we know that an egg was not fertilized, it is acceptable no matter where the blood spot is found. The blood itself, however, must be discarded [theShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 66:7)]. Most of the eggs commercially sold are not fertilized.
17.
For the embryo has not begun to form and has not affected the entire egg.
18.
At this stage of development, the entire egg has been affected. See the Shulchan Aruchand Rama (Yoreh De'ah 66:2-3) which also mention other halachic perspectives with regard to blood found in fertilized eggs.
19.
Even though they could be considered spoiled [see Rashi, Chullin 77a; Rama (Yoreh De'ah 66:7)].
20.
Until it is hatched, however, it is forbidden is indicated by Halachah 8. See also Siftei Cohen15:2 who mentions authorities who suggest that one should wait until its wings start to develop before slaughtering it.
21.
Forbidden because it contracted a wound that will cause it to die within a year.
22.
Although the milk comes from a kosher species, since the animal itself is unacceptable, its milk is also deemed unacceptable.
23.
According to Rabbinic decree, this law applies to eggs that are found within a fowl that died without being ritually slaughtered [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 86:3)].
24.
Chulin 31a states that the fact that the egg from which the embryo is formed is trefedoes not present a halachic problem. The rationale is that, for the embryo to form, the egg must decompose. Hence its halachic status does not affect that of the embryo.
25.
For 21 days [Bechorot 8a; the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 86:99]. This is the amount of time our Sages thought necessary for a fowl to begin laying a new batch of eggs.
26.
I.e., the eggs it was carrying when it first became trefe. Although Chulin 58a states that a fowl which is trefe will not lay eggs, the intent is that it will not lay a new batch of eggs. It will, however, lay the batch it is presently carrying.
27.
There are opinions in the Ashkenazic halachic tradition that forbid such a chick. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 86:7) states that the initial and preferred option is to respect these views.
28.
This term refers to an animal from a kosher species which died without being ritually slaughtered.
29.
For milk to solidify as cheese, it needs a catalyst, rennin, to cause it to curdle. One of the most common sources of rennin was the digestive organs of an animal. For the enzymes that facilitate the digestion of food also produce such an effect. Using the skin of a non-kosher organ causes the cheese to be non-kosher for the reasons the Rambam proceeds to explain. See also Chapter 4, Halachah 19, and Chapter 9, Halachah 15.
As the Ra'avad and Maggid Mishnehmention, Avodah Zarah 35a gives several additional reasons for these prohibitions. The Rambam, however, does not mention them because the factors causing the prohibition could be nullified as explained in the following note. The Maggid Mishnehmentions that there are opinions that maintain that the motivating factor behind the prohibition against non-Jewish cheese is to prevent social interaction between Jews and non-Jews. Hence the prohibitions are never nullified even if there is a substantially larger quantity of the kosher substance.
30.
As will be explained, according to Scriptural Law, when a forbidden substance is mixed together with a kosher substance, it is nullified - i.e, considered as if it has become part of the permitted substance - if the quantity of the permitted substance is greater than it. According to Rabbinic Law, this is true when the quantity of the permitted substance is so great that the taste of the forbidden substance would not be detected. That would certainly be true in the instance at hand. Nevertheless, the forbidden substance is not nullified for the reason explained by the Rambam.
31.
Chapter 9, Halachah 16; Chapter 16, Halachah 26.
32.
This is also the Rambam's view. It is quoted by the the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah115:2. The Rama states that it is customary to follow this view. The Rama continues, stating that when a Jew observes a gentile milking the cows and making the cheese, it is permitted to partake of it even though the cheese belongs to the gentiles. He continues, stating that even if the Jew does not observe the gentile milking the cow, as long as he observes him making the cheese, the cheese is acceptable after the fact. The Turei Zahav 115:11 and the Siftei Cohen 115:22 quote opinions that differ and maintain that the prohibition should be observed even if a Jew did not observe the milking.
This difference of opinion is relevant today, reflecting the difference between chalav Yisrael cheese and ordinary kosher cheese. In both instances, the cheesemaking process is supervised. Chalav Yisraelcheese uses milk that was supervised when milked, while ordinary kosher cheese does not.
33.
For his behavior is in violation of an explicit Rabbinic prohibition. Even though the rationale for the original decree is no longer applicable, the prohibition established by our Rabbis is still in force. (See Hilchot Mamrim2:2.)
In the present era, there are certain Rabbis (see Rav Moshe Feinstein, Igros Moshe) who give a rationale for leniency with regard to this prohibition, stating that government supervision makes it impossible for gentiles to mix non-kosher milk together with cow's milk and thus there is no necessity to heed that prohibition. It must be emphasized, however, that this responsum was authored before the time when it became relative easy to procure chalav Yisrael and that many other Rabbinical authorities never accepted this decision. On the contrary, basing themselves on the ruling of Hilchot Mamrim2:2, they explain that the original decree must still be observed. As a result of their forceful stance, at present, it is possible to obtain chalav Yisrael products in almost every major Jewish community.
34.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 115:3) states that one should not rebuke those who permit the use of such butter, but if the local custom is to forbid it, that custom should be respected. At present, since it is possible to obtain chalav Yisrael butter in almost every major Jewish community, many Rabbis urge that this prohibition be observed.
35.
We are speaking about homemade butter which always has some small drops of whey within it. These drops, however, are not mixed with the butter itself, but instead remain as a separate entity. Hence, they cannot be nullified. See Kessef Mishneh.
36.
This expression connotes a law derived by the Rambam through his deductive reasoning without an existing prior Rabbinic source.
37.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that not only is this permitted after the fact, one may do so at the outset (lechatchilah). For it is possible that there is no forbidden substance present at all.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 115:3) quotes this ruling. Nevertheless, most of the authorities who forbid using non-Jewish butter maintain that, in practice, one should refrain from cooking it as well.
38.
I.e., the amount of non-kosher milk is surely insignificant in relation to the quantity of the mixture as a whole. Hence it is nullified.
39.
I.e., in their own utensils.
40.
As explained in Chapter 17, Halachah 2, it is forbidden to cook food in utensils belonging to gentiles, for the utensil will have absorbed some of the non-kosher food cooked in it previously and will discharge it into the kosher food during the cooking process.
The Kessef Mishneh and the Rama (loc. cit.) differ with the Rambam regarding this issue. See the notes to Chapter 17 Halachah 18, for a discussion of this matter.
41.
Similarly, if the Jew walks in and out of the place where the milking is taking place, it is acceptable. For the gentile will fear that any moment, the Jew will return (Turei Zahav115:3).
42.
The Rambam is explaining that although our Sages require that a Jew observe the milking of an animal, it is not necessary that he watch the actual milking. As long as he is present and could see what the gentile is doing, the gentile will refrain from mixing in a non-kosher substance.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 115:1) states that this ruling applies only after the fact. At the outset, the Jew must observe the milking and also check the container into which the gentile is milking.
The Maggid Mishneh clarifies that this ruling applies only when the gentile is milking the animal for the Jew and knows that the Jew will not drink the milk of the non-kosher animal. If he is not aware of the prohibition, we suspect that he will give the Jew milk from any animal in his herd.
43.
I.e., all kosher eggs have these characteristics, but not all eggs with these characteristics are kosher.
44.
But not a non-Jewish hunter, as evident from the following halachah.
45.
We are certain that he will not lie, because it is possible to bring other eggs from that species and see that they are not alike (Turei Zahav 86:1; Siftei Cohen 86:3).
46.
For the method of verification mentioned in the previous note does not apply.
The Ra'avad rules that if the hunter has an established reputation for observance, we may rely on his word, even though he does not name the species of the fowl. TheMaggid Mishneh states that, as indicated by the conclusion of Halachah 20, the Rambam would also accept that ruling. According to this understanding, the hunter we are speaking about is not known for his observance. Nevertheless, we rely on his statements.
In his notes to Halachah 20, the Rashba emphasizes that we are not speaking about a person who is known to sell non-kosher food as kosher. As evident from Hilchot Maaserot 12:16, such a person is considered as a gentile and his word is not accepted at all. Instead, the intent is someone whose reputation for observance has not been established, but is also not suspect to cause others to transgress.
47.
The Maggid Mishneh quotes the Ramban who differs with the Rambam and maintains that there is no difference between a Jew whose reputation for observance is not established and a gentile. Just like we accept the Jew's word, we accept that of the gentile. For we assume that he will not risk his reputation by making false statements. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 86:1) quotes the Rambam's ruling, while the Turand the Rama cite that of the Ramban.
The Maggid Mishneh also quotes Rashba who states that in the present age, we purchase eggs from gentiles without compunction, because non-kosher species are uncommon and the overwhelming proportion of eggs sold are from chickens or geese. This ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 86:2).
48.
I.e., that died without being ritually slaughtered; see Chapter 4, Halachah 1. We rule leniently, because it is very uncommon to have eggs from fowl in such a condition (Maggid Mishneh).
49.
For we fear that it came from an egg that was trefe (Maggid Mishneh).
50.
For the distinguishing signs themselves are not sufficient for the eggs to be considered kosher. The Maggid Mishneh explains that although Avodah Zarah 40a would appear to indicate that the distinguishing signs are sufficient, since Chullin 64a compares fish eggs to fowl eggs, we assume that all the laws that apply to one apply to the other.
In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 83:8), Rav Yosef Caro quotes the Rambam's ruling, but states that at present, it has become customary to buy any red fish eggs, even from gentiles. Black fish eggs, however, may not be purchased. In his Beit Yosef 81:12, he explains that the Rabbinic authorities of the earlier ages researched the matter and discovered that there are no common non-kosher fish that lay red eggs. See Siftei Cohen 83:27 who quotes other sources from which it is not clear whether or not this ruling was accepted in all communities.
51.
I.e., to preserve them, for it is common to bring fish eggs from distant places.
52.
Naming the species as in Halachah 18.
53.
As indicated by Chapter 11, Halachah 25, today, the same principles that apply in the Diaspora apply in Eretz Yisrael. 54. In the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Terumot 10:9), he states that they possess very little moisture. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling and forbids brine from non-kosher locusts.
55.
For then we assume that the brine came from this species of fish.
56.
For we consider all the open barrels as a single entity and the one fish indicates that the entire quantity is acceptable. See Kessef Mishneh. This represents the Rambam's understanding of Avodah Zarah 39b-40a. The rulings of the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 83:6) quotes the Rambam's ruling, but also those of others who interpret that passage differently.
57.
The intent is not that all the barrels are considered as a single entity, but that since two barrels are discovered to be kosher, we assume that the others are also kosher (Kessef Mishneh).
58.
I.e., by looking at the head and the backbone, the person is able to recognize that the fish comes from a kosher species. One alone, i.e., either the head or the backbone, is not sufficient (Avodah Zarah40a).
59.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Avodah Zarah 2:6), the Rambam explains that it was customary to crush and stir the fish until it produces a mixture like dough that was used as a dip.
60.
I.e., if we discover the head and the backbone of one fish, we may purchase a larger quantity, because we do not expect that kosher fish and non-kosher fish were salted together (Maggid Mishneh).
61.
The Siftei Cohen 83:4 notes that theShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 83:4) does not quote the Rambam's wording and explains that according to that source, it is not necessary for it to be obvious that they all come from one fish.
If it is not obvious that they come from one fish, the the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) rules that only the piece with scales is permitted.
62.
For every fish that has scales will also have fins.
Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 4
Halacha 1
A person who partakes of an olive-sized portion of a domesticated animal, wild beast, or fowl which dies is liable for lashes, as [Deuteronomy 14:21] states: "Do not partake of any nevelah."1 All animals that were not slaughtered in the appropriate manner are considered as if they died. In the Laws ofShechitah, we will explain which types of slaughter are appropriate and which are not.
Halacha 2
Only animals from kosher species are forbidden as a nevelah, for they are the species that are fit to be ritually slaughtered and if they are slaughtered in a kosher manner, it is permitted to partake of them. [When,] by contrast, one partakes of [meat from] a non-kosher species, [since] ritual slaughter is of no consequence with regard to them, whether they are slaughtered in a kosher manner, whether they died in a natural manner, or whether one cut meat from a living animal and ate it, one does not receive lashes for partaking of anevelah or partaking of trefe meat,2 only because one ate the meat of a non-kosher animal.3
Halacha 3
When a person eats an [entire] kosher fowl4 of any size, he is liable for lashes for partaking of a nevelah, even though he ate less than an olive-sized portion. [The rationale is that] he consumed it in its entirety.5 If he ate it after it died, it must be the size of an olive [for him to be liable].6 Even though it does not have an olive-sized portion of meat on it, since as a whole, it is the size of an olive, he is liable for [partaking of] a nevelah.7
Halacha 4
When a person partakes of an olive-sized portion of a stillborn fetus8of a kosher animal, he is liable for lashes for partaking of a nevelah.
It is forbidden to partake of a newborn animal until the night of the eighth day [of its life].9 For whenever an animal has not lived for eight days, we consider it as stillborn, but lashes are not administered [for partaking] of it.10[Moreover,] if it is known that the animal was born after a full term period of gestation, i.e., nine months for a large domesticated animal and five months for a small domesticated animal, it is permitted on the day that it was born.11
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
When a person eats an olive-sized portion of a kosher14 domesticated animal, wild beast, or fowl that was mortally wounded is liable for lashes, as [Exodus 22:30] states: "Do not eat meat [from an animal that was] mortally wounded (trefe) in the field. Cast it to the dogs."15
The term trefe employed by the Torah refers to [an animal] mortally wounded by a wild beast, e.g., a lion, a tiger, or the like, or a fowl mortally wounded by a bird of prey, e.g., a hawk or the like.16 We cannot say that the term trefe refers to an animal that was attacked and killed, for if it died, it is a nevelah. What difference does it make if it died naturally, was struck by a sword or died, or was battered by a lion and died? Thus [the term trefe] must refer to an instance when it was mortally wounded, but did not die.
Halacha 7
If an animal that is mortally wounded is forbidden, shall we say that if a wolf or a lion comes and drags a kid by its foot, its tail, or its ear, and a man pursues [the beast] and saves [the kid], it will be forbidden, because it was attacked?17The Torah states: "Do not eat meat [from an animal that was] mortally wounded (trefe) in the field. Cast it to the dogs." [An animal is not consideredtrefe] unless it was brought to a state that its meat is fit [only] for the dogs. Thus we have learned that the term trefe employed by the Torah refers to [an animal] that was attacked by a wild beast and battered by it that has not died yet. Even if the person hurries and slaughters it before it dies, it is forbidden as trefe. For it is impossible that it will live after suffering such wounds.
Halacha 8
Thus we have learned that the Torah forbade [an animal] that died, a nevelah, and it forbade one that was on the verge of death because of its wounds even though it has not died yet, i.e., a trefe.
Now we do not make a distinction with regard to an animal that has died regardless of whether it died naturally, it fell and died, it was strangled until it died, or it was attacked by a wild beast who killed it. Similarly, we do not make a distinction between an animal that is on the verge of death, regardless of whether it was attacked by an animal and battered, fell from the roof and broke the majority of its ribs,18fell and crushed its limbs, it was shot with an arrow and its heart or lung pierced, it developed an illness that caused its heart or lung to be perforated, one broke the majority of its ribs, or the like. Since it is on the verge of death regardless of the cause, it is a trefe. [This applies] whether [its wound] was caused by flesh and blood or by God's hand.
If so, why does the Torah use the term trefe? For Scripture speaks with regard to prevalent situations.19 [We are forced] to say this. If not, only an animal that was mortally wounded in the field would be forbidden.20 One that is mortally wounded in a courtyard would not be forbidden. Thus we learn that Scripture [is employing this example,] only because it speaks with regard to prevalent situations.
Halacha 9
The intent of the verse is that [an animal] that is mortally wounded and will not live21 because of these wounds is forbidden. On this basis, our Sages said:22"This is the general principle: Whenever [an animal] in this condition will not live, it is trefe." In Hilchot Shechitah,23 we will explain which conditions cause an animal to be deemed trefe and which do not cause it to be deemed trefe.
Halacha 10
Similarly, when one cuts meat from a living kosher24 animal, one receives lashes for partaking of a trefe.25 For this meat comes from an animal that has not been ritually slaughtered and has not died. [Hence it is comparable to atrefe.] What difference does it make to me if it was attacked by an animal or cut by a knife? And what difference does it make if [the animal] was [wounded] in its totality or only a portion of it was wounded?26 For the verse states: "Do not eat meat [from an animal that was] trefe in the field." Since [a portion of] the animal was made meat in the field,27 it is trefe.
Halacha 11
When an animal is sick because it is weakened and is on the verge of death, it is permitted, because it did not suffer a wound in any one of the limbs and organs that will cause it to die. For the Torah forbade only those situations resembling an animal mortally wounded by a preying wild beast. In that situation, the animal wounded it with a blow that caused it to die.28
Halacha 12
Although it is permitted, the great sages would not partake [of the meat] of an animal which people were hurrying to slaughter before it died.29 [This applies] even if it makes convulsive movements after being slaughtered.30 This is a matter that does not involve a prohibition. Nevertheless, whoever desires to accept this stringency upon himself is praiseworthy.31
Halacha 13
When a person slaughters a domesticated animal, wild beast, or fowl and blood does not flow out from them, they are permitted. We do not say: perhaps they were dead already. Similarly, when one slaughters a healthy animal and it does not make convulsive movements, it is permitted.
Different [rules apply with regard to an animal that] is dangerously ill, i.e., one which cannot maintain itself when others cause it to stand it up.32 [It is placed in this category] even if it eats the food of healthy animals. If [such an animal] is slaughtered and does not make any convulsive movements at all, it is anevelah33and one is liable for lashes [for partaking] of it. If it makes convulsive movements, it is permitted.
The convulsive movements must be made at the end of the slaughter. If they are made at the beginning, they are of no consequence.
Halacha 14
What is meant by convulsive movements? For a small domesticated animal and for both a small and a large wild beast, the intent is that it extended its foreleg and returned it, extended its hind leg even though it did not return it, or merely bent its hind leg.34 This is considered a convulsive movement and [the animal] is permitted. If, however, it merely extended its foreleg and did not return it, it is forbidden. [This movement is] merely a result of the expiration of the soul.
With regard to a large domesticated animal, [more lenient laws apply]. If it either extended its foreleg or its hind leg without bending it or bent its foreleg or hind leg without extending it, it is considered as a convulsive movement and it is permitted. If, however, it neither extended or bent its foreleg or its hind leg at all, it is considered as a nevelah.
Halacha 15
Halacha 16
None of the substances prohibited by the Torah can be combined with each other [to reach the minimum measure for which one is liable for lashes] with the exception of the prohibitions that apply to a nazarite, as explained in that source.39 Therefore when a person takes a small amount of fat, a small amount of blood, a small amount of the meat of a non-kosher animal, a small amount of the meat of a nevelah, a small amount of the meat of a non-kosher fish, a small amount of the meat of a non-kosher fowl, or the like from other prohibited substances, although he collects an olive-sized portion from the entire mixture and partakes of it, he is not liable for lashes. He is bound by the laws that apply when one eats half the minimum measure [of a forbidden] substance.40
Halacha 17
All [types of] nevelot may be combined together. A nevelah may be combined with a trefe. All the non-kosher animals and wild beasts may be combined with each other. But the meat of a nevelah and the meat of a non-kosher animal may not be combined.
What is implied? When one takes [some meat] from a nevelah of an ox, some from the nevelah of a deer, some from the nevelah of a chicken and combined it so that he has an olive-sized portion of meat, he is liable for lashes if he eats it. Similarly, if he collected half of an olive-sized portion from the nevelah of a kosher animal and half of an olive-sized portion from a trefe, or half of an olive-sized portion from the meat of a nevelah and half from meat taken from a living kosher animal,41 he is liable if he eats it. Similarly, if he collects an olive-sized portion [by combining] the meat of a camel, a pig, and a hare,42 he is liable if he eats it.
If, by contrast, he takes half of an olive-sized portion of a nevelah of an ox and half an olive-sized portion of a camel [an eats it], they are not combined.43Similar principles apply in all analogous situations. Similarly, the meat of a non-kosher animal, fowl, or fish are not combined for they involve different prohibitions. For each one is forbidden by a separate negative commandment, as we explained.44 Nevertheless, all the forbidden species of fowl can be combined as may all the forbidden species of domesticated animals and wild beasts.
This is the general principle: Whenever substances are included in the same prohibition, they may be combined. [If they are included] in two [separate] prohibitions, they are not combined. The [only] exceptions are a nevelah and atrefe. [The rationale is that] a trefe is the beginning of [an animal] becoming anevelah.
Halacha 18
When a person eats the skin, the bones, the sinews,45 the horns, or the hoofs46 of a nevelah, a trefe, or a non-kosher domesticated animal or wild beast, from the nails of a non-kosher fowl in the places where blood would spurt through when they are cut off, or from their placenta,47 although this is forbidden, he is not liable. [The rationale is that] they are not fit to be eaten. They cannot be combined with meat [in the measure of] an olive-sized portion.
Halacha 19
[Milk found in] the stomach of a nevelah and the stomach of a non-kosher animal48 is permitted, for it is like other waste products of the body. Therefore, it is permitted to use [milk found in] the stomach of an animal slaughtered by a gentile or the stomach of a non-kosher domesticated animal or wild beast to cause cheese to solidify.49 The skin of the stomach, by contrast, is like the other digestive organs and is forbidden.
Halacha 20
The placenta of a donkey50 is permitted to be eaten because it is like dung and urine which is permitted. There is skin which is considered like meat and one who partakes of an olive-sized portion is considered like one who eats an olive-sized portion of meat, provided one partakes of it when it is soft.51
Halacha 21
The following [types of] skins are considered like meat: the skin of a human, the skin of a domesticated pig,52 the skin of a camel's hump upon which a burden has never been loaded, [because] it has not reached the age [to serve as a beast] of burden, for then it is still soft, the skin of genital area, the skin that is below the tail, the skin of a fetus, the skin of the hedgehog, the chameleon, the lizard, the snail.53 When all of these skins are soft, they are considered like meat with regard to all matters, whether with regard to [liability54 for] the prohibition against partaking of them or with regard to the laws of ritual purity.55
Halacha 22
With regard to an ox condemned to be stoned,56 [Exodus 21:28] states: "Its meat shall not be eaten." Now, how could one think that it would be eaten after it was stoned to death, for it is a nevelah?57 Instead, the Torah is coming to teach you that once it has been sentenced to execution by stoning, it becomes forbidden; it becomes like a non-kosher animal. [Even] if one hurried and slaughtered it in an acceptable manner [before it was executed], it is forbidden to benefit from it.58 If one eats an olive-sized portion of its meat, he is liable for lashes. And when it is executed by stoning, its [meat] should not be sold or given to the dogs or to a gentile, [as implied by the phrase]: "shall not be eaten."59 It is permitted [to benefit from] the dung of an ox condemned to be stoned.60
If it is discovered that [a condemned ox] is not liable to be stoned after it was sentenced, e.g., the witnesses who testified against it were disqualified, it may be sent out to pasture with the herd. If this was discovered after it was executed, it is permitted to benefit from [its meat].
FOOTNOTES
1.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 180) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 472) include this among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
2.
See Halachah 10.
3.
From Chullin 100b, it would appear that the rationale for this ruling is the general principle: "One prohibition does not fall upon another prohibition." Since the meat is already prohibited because it is from a non-kosher species, the prohibition of neveladoes not apply to it. The Rambam's wording, however, is slightly different and may be alluding to a slightly different rationale.
4.
Which was not correctly slaughtered.
5.
This reflects a general concept with regard to the laws of kashrut. As stated in Chapter 2, Law 21, whenever "one eats an entire forbidden creature by itself, one is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law even if it is smaller than a mustard seed."
The commentaries (Maggid Mishneh, Rav Moshe HaCohen) question why the Rambam states that the person is liable for eating a nevelah. Seemingly, the prohibition he transgresses is eating a limb from a living animal (see Chapter 5). The Meiri explains the Rambam's position, stating that an entire creature cannot be considered as "a limb."
6.
For the conception of being liable for an entire creature even though it is not the size of an olive, applies only when that creature is inherently forbidden (Meiri). While alive, the bird is considered as an entire forbidden entity, like a non-kosher species. After its death, that distinction does not apply.
7.
For we include the bones and the sinews as well (Chullin 102b).
8.
The same laws apply if the fetus is born alive, but it is obvious that the birth is not viable. Even if the animal is slaughtered in the appropriate manner, we are forbidden to partake of it.
9.
I.e., even if the animal is slaughtered properly, it is forbidden because it is possible that the birth is not viable. Although our Sages (Chulin 136a) spoke of the eighth day of an animal's life, their intent was the beginning of the eighth day (Maggid Mishneh).
10.
Since it is not a definite matter, lashes are not administered (ibid.).
11.
In contrast, an animal may not be offered as a sacrifice until the eighth day of its life (Exodus 22:29; Turei Zahav 15:3).
12.
I.e., he is not considered to have partaken of a nevelah.
13.
For as stated in Halachah 18, these are not considered meat, but rather comparable to an animal's wastes. For that reason, the Ra'avad (in his gloss to Chapter 5, Halachah 13) states that there is no prohibition against partaking of a placenta.
14.
I.e., like the prohibition of nevelah, the prohibition of trefe does not apply with regard to non-kosher species.
15.
I.e., even if it was slaughtered properly before it died, the meat is, nevertheless, forbidden, as stated in the following halachah. Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 181) and Sefer HaChinuch(mitzvah 73) include this among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
16.
As the Rambam proceeds to explain in Halachah 8, the term trefe also applies in other situations. Nevertheless, there is an added dimension of severity to the laws applying to animals that are mortally wounded by beasts, as stated in Hilchot Shechitah 5:3 (Maggid Mishneh; Kessef Mishneh).
17.
The term trefe literally means "preyed upon." Our translation "mortally wounded" is the halachic definition as the Rambam proceeds to explain.
18.
This and the following examples are specifically mentioned by the Rambam inHilchot Shechitah 10:1, 9:8, 11:4, 6:1.
19.
This is a general principle employed by our Sages with regard to the interpretation of the Torah's language. When it mentions a specific situation, it is not confining itself to the limited setting mentioned in the verse, but applies to other circumstances as well. Why is that situation mentioned? Because it is common.
20.
For only that is in the direct scope of the verse.
21.
Longer than twelve months (Hilchot Shechitah 11:1).
22.
Chulin 42a.
23.
From Chapter Five to Chapter Eleven. A concise list is found in Chapter 10, Halachah 9.
24.
For as mentioned above, the prohibition against partaking of a trefe applies only with regard to kosher animals.
25.
See Chapter Five, Halachot 2-3, where the Rambam distinguishes between this prohibition and the prohibition against partaking of a limb from a living animal. Note, however, Hilchot Melachim 9:10-11 where the Rambam includes eating the meat from an animal and eating a limb from an animal as a single prohibition for a gentile.
26.
I.e., just as we forbid the meat of an animal that was mortally wounded, we should forbid a portion of meat that was cut off with a knife.
27.
I.e., the meat was cut off from its natural place. See also Chapter 5, Halachah 9.
28.
With this explanation, the Rambam is clarifying the distinction Chulin 37a makes between an animal which is misukenet(dangerously ill) and trefe. The trefecondition is a result of wound, while in the case of a misukenet, all of its limbs and organs are sound. Nevertheless, as stated in Hilchot Trefot 5:2, there are other physical conditions which render an animal trefe even if it has not been attacked by an animal. These conditions were communicated as halachot to Moses at Sinai.
29.
The Maggid Mishneh (based on Chullin 37b) interprets this as a gesture of pious conduct. Note, however, Siftei Cohen 17:8.
30.
Such a convulsive movement is a sign that it was alive at the time that it was slaughtered, as the Rambam continues to explain in the following halachah.
31.
The Maggid Mishneh quotes opinions that maintain that this leniency was granted only to alleviate the financial loss a Jewish owner of an animal would suffer. Therefore, meat from an animal belonging to a gentile which is in such a condition should not be eaten. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 116:7) quotes this ruling.
32.
It must be able to stand up on its own when called or hit with a switch. If it is stood up by hand, it is still considered dangerously ill even if it is able to remain standing [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 17:1); Siftei Cohen 17:1].
33.
I.e., we assume that it died before the slaughter was completed (see Chulin 38a).
34.
The Maggid Mishneh and the Siftei Cohen17:4 quote opinions that rule that if a small domesticated animal's foreleg was extended and it bent it, that is sufficient to render it acceptable.
35.
Note the Siftei Cohen 17:5 which quotes different versions of Chullin 38b that state that a fowl must move its wing. Winking its eyes is not sufficient.
36.
The Maggid Mishneh (and the Turei Zahav17:4 and the Siftei Cohen 17:6) quote opinions that maintain that swishing its tail is also sufficient for an animal to be considered as having made a convulsive movement.
37.
I.e., because he cannot see. Needless to say, if the room is illuminated, this law does not apply.
38.
I.e., we follow the principle that when a doubt concerning a Scriptural prohibition is involved, we rule stringently.
39.
As stated in Hilchot Nazirut 5:3, although there are separate prohibitions against eating raisins, grape peels, grape seeds, and partaking of wine, if one combined all these substances together, one is liable.
40.
In which instance, the prohibition is Scriptural in origin, but lashes are not given (Chapter 3, Halachah 6).
The Rambam's statements in this and th following halachah touch on an issue of general significance. Rabbi Meir (Avodah Zarah 66a) maintains that forbidden substances of different types can be combined together to make a person liable for lashes. The Sages differ and maintain that they cannot be combined, but instead are judged individually. If there is enough of the one substance to make one liable, he is liable. If not, he is exempt.
The principle stated in Halachot 18-19 is a correlory to these concepts. Since the forbidden substances are not combined with each other, but are instead considered as discrete entities, they help nullify each other, as explained there.
41.
For this is included in the prohibition against a trefe, as stated in Halachah 10.
42.
Although each one of these species is mentioned separately in the Torah, they are all included in the same prohibition.
43.
The Ra'avad mentions that this point is the subject of a difference of opinion among the Sages of the Talmud, seemingly implying that the opinion which maintains that they should be combined should be followed. TheMaggid Mishneh justifies the Rambam's position.
44.
See Chapter 2.
45.
Note the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 9:1) which interprets the Hebrew term giddim as also referring to veins, arteries, and nerves.
46.
This applies even if the portions eaten were soft and blood spurts from them.
47.
As stated in Halachah 5.
48.
The Rambam does not distinguish between milk that has coagulated and milk that is fluid. For even if it is fluid, it is already considered as a waste product. (Kessef Mishneh).
49.
I.e., since the digestive juices from the animal's stomach have already mixed with this milk, it will be an effective catalyst to cause the large quantity of milk to curdle and harden into cheese. See also Chapter 3, Halachah 13, and Chapter 9, Halachah 15.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 81:6) differs and quotes Rabbenu Tam's opinion states that liquid milk found in the stomach of a forbidden species is forbidden. Moreover, at the outset, one should not use even dried milk found in the stomach of a non-kosher animal as a catalyst because of the impression it will create. After the fact, it is permitted.
50.
Our translation is based on the glosses of Rashi and Tosafot, Bechoros 7b. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling and maintains that this placenta is forbidden. The Maggid Mishneh justifies the Rambam's ruling.
51.
And not processed so that it becomes hard like leather.
52.
That of a wild boar, by contrast, is too tough to be eaten.
53.
As mentioned in the notes to Chapter 2, Halachah 7, the names of these species are a matter of debate.
54.
This addition is necessary, for there is a prohibition against partaking of any skin, as stated in Halachah 18.
55.
For an olive-sized portion of the meat of anevelah can convey ritual impurity, while a hide or a piece of leather that size does not.
56.
For goring a human being. See Hilchot Nizkei Mammon, ch. 10, which explains the pertinent laws.
57.
For it died without ritual slaughter.
58.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 188) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 52) include this among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
Instead, the corpse of the executed animal should be buried (Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 19:11).
59.
As stated in Chapter 8, Halachah 15, unless there is a teaching that states otherwise, this phrase implies both a prohibition against eating and a prohibition against deriving benefit.
60.
As stated in Hilchot Ishut 5:2, the rationale is that the dung is considered of negligible importance with regard to the ox itself. As implied by Halachah 20, the dung of an animal is not considered as part of the animal itself, nor is it included in the prohibitions applying to it.
---------------------
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Sunday, Adar I 12, 5776 · 21 February 2016
Wednesday 12 Adar I 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Tetzaveh, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 66-68.
Tanya: If so (p. 125)...end of Ch. 13. (p. 127).
It is written: "The gift of man makes room for him and leads him before the great."1
Some are renowned for their wisdom or wealth. But "the gift of man" - when an individual gives his "man," i.e., devotes himself to an undertaking to strengthen Judaism, then not only will he "make room for himself" (releasing him from constrictions and bounds), but it "leads him before the great" (his position will be superior to the great).
FOOTNOTES
1. Mishlei 18:16.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Sunday, Adar I 12, 5776 · 21 February 2016
Wednesday 12 Adar I 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Tetzaveh, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 66-68.
Tanya: If so (p. 125)...end of Ch. 13. (p. 127).
It is written: "The gift of man makes room for him and leads him before the great."1
Some are renowned for their wisdom or wealth. But "the gift of man" - when an individual gives his "man," i.e., devotes himself to an undertaking to strengthen Judaism, then not only will he "make room for himself" (releasing him from constrictions and bounds), but it "leads him before the great" (his position will be superior to the great).
FOOTNOTES
1. Mishlei 18:16.
---------------------
Daily Thought:
Until the Blossoms Come
If the world did not need you and you did not need this world, you would never have come here. G‑d does not cast His precious child into the pain of this journey without purpose.
You say you cannot see a reason. Why should it surprise you that a creature cannot fathom the plan of its Creator?
Now is the time to dig your hands into the earth, to tend to the garden, to care for life. Soon will come a time to understand, when the fruits of your labor blossom for all to see.
---------------------
CHABAD - TODAY IN JUDAISM: Sunday, February 14, 2016 - Today is: Sunday, Adar I 5, 5776 · February 14, 2016
Daily Quote:
"And the pit was empty; there was no water in it" (Genesis 37:24). From the implication of what is said, "And the pit was empty," do I not know that there was no water in it? What then is taught by, "there was no water in it"? There was no water, but there were snakes and scorpions in it...[Talmud, Shabbat 22a]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tetzaveh, 1st Portion Exodus 27:20-28:12 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 27
20And you shall command the children of Israel, and they shall take to you pure olive oil, crushed for lighting, to kindle the lamps continually. כוְאַתָּ֞ה תְּצַוֶּ֣ה | אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְיִקְח֨וּ אֵלֶ֜יךָ שֶׁ֣מֶן זַ֥יִת זָ֛ךְ כָּתִ֖ית לַמָּא֑וֹר לְהַֽעֲלֹ֥ת נֵ֖ר תָּמִֽיד:
pure: Without sediment, as we learned in Men. (86a): “He allows it to ripen at the top of the olive tree, etc.” ואתה תצוה, זך: בלי שמרים, כמו ששנינו במנחות (פו א) מגרגרו בראש הזית וכו':
crushed: He must crush the olives in a mortar, but he may not grind them in a mill, so that they will not contain sediment. After he has extracted the first drop [of oil], he places them [the olives] into a mill and grinds them. The [resulting] second oil is unfit for the menorah but is fit for meal offerings, as it is said: “crushed for lighting,” but not crushed for meal offerings. -[from Men. 86a] כתית: הזיתים היה כותש במכתשת, ואינו טוחנן בריחים, כדי שלא יהו בו שמרים, ואחר שהוציא טפה ראשונה מכניסן לריחים וטוחנן, והשמן השני פסול למנורה וכשר למנחות, שנאמר כתית למאור, ולא כתית למנחות:
to kindle the lamps continually: Heb. לְהַעִלֹת, lit., to cause to rise. [The kohen] shall light it until the flame rises by itself. -[from Shab. 21a] להעלות נר תמיד: מדליק עד שתהא שלהבת עולה מאליה:
continually: Heb. תָּמִיד. [Since it burns] every night, it is called תָּמִיד, as you say: “a continual burnt offering” (עֹלַת תָּמִיד)” (Exod. 29:42, Num. 28:6), [which is called “continual”] although it is [offered up] only from day to day. Similarly, concerning the flat pan meal offering [of the Kohen Gadol, the word] תָּמִיד is mentioned although it is [offered up] only half in the morning and [the other] half in the evening. [The word] תָּמִיד mentioned concerning the showbread (Exod. 25:30), however, [literally] means from Sabbath to Sabbath [i.e., continually]. תמיד: כל לילה ולילה קרוי תמיד, כמו שאתה אומר (במדבר כח ו) עולת תמיד, ואינה אלא מיום ליום. וכן במנחת חביתין נאמר (ויקרא ו יג) תמיד, ואינה אלא מחציתה בבקר ומחציתה בערב. אבל תמיד האמור בלחם הפנים משבת לשבת הוא:
21In the Tent of Meeting, outside the dividing curtain that is in front of the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall set it up before the Lord from evening to morning; [it shall be] an everlasting statute for their generations, from the children of Israel. כאבְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵד֩ מִח֨וּץ לַפָּרֹ֜כֶת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־הָֽעֵדֻ֗ת יַֽעֲרֹךְ֩ אֹת֨וֹ אַֽהֲרֹ֧ן וּבָנָ֛יו מֵעֶ֥רֶב עַד־בֹּ֖קֶר לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה חֻקַּ֤ת עוֹלָם֙ לְדֹ֣רֹתָ֔ם מֵאֵ֖ת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:
from evening to morning: Give it its measure so that it will burn from evening to morning. And the Sages estimated [that this is] a half of a log [between 6 and 10.6 fl. oz.] for the long nights of Teveth, and similarly for all the nights. If any of it remains, it does not matter. [from Men. 89a] מערב עד בקר: תן לה מדתה שתהא דולקת מערב עד בקר, ושיערו חכמים חצי לוג ללילי טבת הארוכין, וכן לכל הלילות, ואם יותר אין בכך כלום:
Exodus Chapter 28
1And you bring near to yourself your brother Aaron, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel to serve Me [as kohanim]: Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar, Aaron's sons. אוְאַתָּ֡ה הַקְרֵ֣ב אֵלֶ֩יךָ֩ אֶת־אַֽהֲרֹ֨ן אָחִ֜יךָ וְאֶת־בָּנָ֣יו אִתּ֗וֹ מִתּ֛וֹךְ בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לְכַֽהֲנוֹ־לִ֑י אַֽהֲרֹ֕ן נָדָ֧ב וַֽאֲבִיה֛וּא אֶלְעָזָ֥ר וְאִֽיתָמָ֖ר בְּנֵ֥י אַֽהֲרֹֽן:
And you bring near to yourself your brother Aaron, and his sons with him: After you complete the work of the Mishkan. ואתה הקרב אליך: לאחר שתגמר מלאכת המשכן:
2You shall make holy garments for your brother Aaron, for honor and glory. בוְעָשִׂ֥יתָ בִגְדֵי־קֹ֖דֶשׁ לְאַֽהֲרֹ֣ן אָחִ֑יךָ לְכָב֖וֹד וּלְתִפְאָֽרֶת:
3And you shall speak to all the wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, and they shall make Aaron's garments to sanctify him, [so] that he serve Me [as a kohen]. גוְאַתָּ֗ה תְּדַבֵּר֙ אֶל־כָּל־חַכְמֵי־לֵ֔ב אֲשֶׁ֥ר מִלֵּאתִ֖יו ר֣וּחַ חָכְמָ֑ה וְעָשׂ֞וּ אֶת־בִּגְדֵ֧י אַֽהֲרֹ֛ן לְקַדְּשׁ֖וֹ לְכַֽהֲנוֹ־לִֽי:
to sanctify him, [so] that he serve Me [as a kohen]: Heb. לְקַדְּשׁוֹ לְכַהִנוֹ-לִי, to sanctify him, to initiate him into the kehunah through these garment [so] that he would be a kohen to Me. The expression of kehunah means service, serjanterie [or serventrie] in Old French. לקדשו לכהנו לי: לקדשו להכניסו בכהונה על ידי הבגדים שיהא כהן לי, ולשון כהונה שירות הוא, שוריינטריא"ה בלעז [שירות]:
4And these are the garments that they shall make: a choshen, an ephod, a robe, a tunic of checker work, a cap, and a sash. They shall make holy garments for your brother Aaron and for his sons to serve Me [as kohanim]. דוְאֵ֨לֶּה הַבְּגָדִ֜ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר יַֽעֲשׂ֗וּ ח֤שֶׁן וְאֵפוֹד֙ וּמְעִ֔יל וּכְתֹ֥נֶת תַּשְׁבֵּ֖ץ מִצְנֶ֣פֶת וְאַבְנֵ֑ט וְעָשׂ֨וּ בִגְדֵי־קֹ֜דֶשׁ לְאַֽהֲרֹ֥ן אָחִ֛יךָ וּלְבָנָ֖יו לְכַֽהֲנוֹ־לִֽי:
a choshen: An ornament opposite the heart. חשן: תכשיט כנגד הלב:
an ephod: I did not hear (that it was a garment) [i.e., I have no tradition concerning the ephod], and I did not find the explanation of its pattern in the Baraitha [Melecheth HaMishkan]. My heart tells me that he [the Kohen Gadol] was girded with it [the ephod] from behind, its width being like the width of an [average] man’s back, similar to a kind of apron called porzent [or pourceint], [a kind of] belt, [like an] apron [back to front] that princesses wear when they ride horseback. So it was made from below [i.e., for the lower part of the body], as it is said: “and David was girded with a linen ephod” (II Sam. 6:14). [Thus] we learn that the ephod was a belt. It is impossible, however, to say that it was only a belt, because it is said: “and he put the ephod on him,” and afterwards, “and he girded him with the band of the ephod (בְּחֵשֶׁב הָאֵפוֹד) ” (Lev. 8:7), which Onkelos renders: בְּהֶמְיַן אֵפוֹדָא. [Thus] we learn that the חֵשֶׁב was the band and the ephod was a separate decoration. It is also impossible to say that because of the two shoulder straps in it, it is called ephod, for it is said: “the two shoulder straps of the ephod” (verse 27). [Thus] we learn that the ephod was a separate entity, the shoulder straps were a separate entity, and the band was a separate entity. Therefore, I say that because of the apron below it is called ephod because he decorates and adorns himself with it, as it is said: “and he decorated him with it” (Lev. 8:7); the חֵשֶׁב is the band above it, to which the shoulder straps were attached. Moreover, my heart tells me that there is evidence that it is a kind of garment, for Jonathan rendered “and David was girded with a linen ephod” (II Sam. 6: 14) as כַּרְדּוּט דְּבוּץ and he renders likewise מְעִילִים as כַּרְדּוּטִין, in the narrative of Tamar, Absalom’s sister, “for in this manner the king’s virgin daughters dressed, in robes (מְעִילִים) ” (II Sam. 13:18). ואפוד: לא שמעתי ולא מצאתי בברייתא פירוש תבניתו, ולבי אומר לי שהוא חגור לו מאחוריו, רחבו כרוחב גב איש, כמין סינר שקורין פורציינ"ט בלעז [חגורה] שחוגרות השרות כשרוכבות על הסוסים, כך מעשהו מלמטה, שנאמר (שמואל ב ו יד) ודוד חגור אפוד בד, למדנו שהאפוד חגורה היא. ואי אפשר לומר שאין בו אלא חגורה לבדה, שהרי נאמר (ויקרא ח ז) ויתן עליו את האפוד, ואחר כך ויחגור אותו בחשב האפוד, ותרגם אונקלוס בהמיין אפודא, למדנו שהחשב הוא החגור, והאפוד שם תכשיט לבדו. ואי אפשר לומר שעל שם שתי הכתפות שבו הוא קרוי אפוד, שהרי נאמר (פסוק כז) שתי כתפות האפוד, למדנו שהאפוד שם לבד, והכתפות שם לבד, והחשב שם לבד. לכך אני אומר שעל שם הסינר של מטה קרוי אפוד, על שם שאופדו ומקשטו בו, כמו שנאמר (ויקרא ח ז) ויאפוד לו בו, והחשב הוא החגור שלמעלה הימנו, והכתפות קבועות בו. ועוד אומר לי לבי, שיש ראיה שהוא מין לבוש, שתרגם יונתן (שמואל ב' ו יד) ודוד חגור אפוד בד, כרדוט דבוץ. ותרגם כמו כן מעילים, כרדוטין, במעשה תמר אחות אבשלום (שמואל ב יג יח) כי כן תלבשנה בנות המלך הבתולות מעילים:
a robe: Heb. מְעִיל. It is a kind of tunic, as is the כְּתֹנֶת, only that the כְּתֹנֶת is [worn] next to his flesh and the מְעִיל is [what is] called the outside robe. ומעיל: הוא כמין חלוק, וכן הכתונת, אלא שהכתונת סמוך לבשרו ומעיל קרוי חלוק עליון:
of checker work: Heb. ךְתַּשְׁבֵּץ. Made of boxes (מִשְׁבְּצוֹת) for beauty. The boxes are similar to holes made in gold jewelry as a setting for precious stones and pearls, as it is said regarding the ephod stones: “enclosed in gold settings (מִשְׁבְּצוֹת) ” (verse 11), and in Old French it is called cha(s)tons, settings. [I.e., the boxes of the checker work on the tunic are like settings for precious gems.] תשבץ: עשויין משבצות לנוי, והמשבצות הן כמין גומות העשויות בתכשיטי זהב למושב קביעות אבנים טובות ומרגליות, כמו שנאמר באבני האפוד (פסוק יא) מוסבות משבצות זהב, ובלעז קוראין אותו קשטונ"ש [משבצות]:
a cap: Heb. מִצְנֶפֶת, a type of dome-shaped hat, called cofia in Old French, because elsewhere (verse 40) [the Torah] calls them מִגְבָּעוֹת, and the Targum [Onkelos] renders: כּוֹבָעִין. מצנפת: כמין כיפת כובע שקורין קויפ"א בלעז [שביס עשוי רשת], שהרי במקום אחר קורא להם (לט כח) מגבעות, ומתרגמינן כובעין:
and a sash: This is the belt on the tunic, and the ephod is the belt on the robe, as we find in the order they were put on: “and put upon him the tunic, girded him with the sash, clothed him with the robe, put upon him the ephod” (Lev. 8:7). ואבנט: היא חגורה על הכתונת, והאפוד חגורה על המעיל, כמו שמצינו בסדר לבישתן (ויקרא ח ז) ויתן עליו את הכתנת ויחגור אותו באבנט וילבש אותו את המעיל ויתן עליו את האפוד:
holy garments: From the offering sanctified for My name they shall make it. בגדי קדש: מתרומה המקודשת לשמי יעשו אותם:
5They shall take the gold, the blue, purple, and crimson wool, and the linen, הוְהֵם֙ יִקְח֣וּ אֶת־הַזָּהָ֔ב וְאֶת־הַתְּכֵ֖לֶת וְאֶת־הָֽאַרְגָּמָ֑ן וְאֶת־תּוֹלַ֥עַת הַשָּׁנִ֖י וְאֶת־הַשֵּֽׁשׁ:
They shall take: Those wise-hearted people, who are to make the garments, shall receive from the donors the gold and the blue wool from which to make the garments. והם יקחו: אותם חכמי לב שיעשו הבגדים, יקבלו מן המתנדבים את הזהב ואת התכלת לעשות מהן את הבגדים:
6and they shall make the ephod of gold, blue, purple, and crimson wool, and twisted fine linen, the work of a master weaver. ווְעָשׂ֖וּ אֶת־הָֽאֵפֹ֑ד זָ֠הָ֠ב תְּכֵ֨לֶת וְאַרְגָּמָ֜ן תּוֹלַ֧עַת שָׁנִ֛י וְשֵׁ֥שׁ מָשְׁזָ֖ר מַֽעֲשֵׂ֥ה חשֵֽׁב:
and they shall make the ephod: If I would try to explain the making of the ephod and the choshen according to the order of the verses, their explanation would be fragmentary and the reader would err in combining them. Therefore, I am writing [first] how they were made, as it was [i.e., in its entirety], so that the reader will be able to run through it [quickly]. Afterwards, I will explain it [how they were made] according to the sequence of the verses. The ephod was designed like a sort of apron worn by women who ride horseback [see Rashi on verse 4], and he [the Kohen Gadol] would gird [himself with] it from behind, opposite his heart, below his elbows, its width equaling the width of a man’s back and more, and it [the ephod] would reach his ankles. The belt was attached to the top of it across its width, [it was] the work of a weaver, and it extended on both sides in order to wrap [the Kohen Gadol] and gird [him] with it. The shoulder straps were attached to the belt-one to the right and one to the left from behind the Kohen [Gadol], at the two ends of the width of the apron. When he held them [i.e., the shoulder straps] upright, they stood [i.e., lay flat] on his two shoulders. They were like two straps made from the same material as the ephod [and they were] long enough to place them upright alongside his neck on either side. They were folded in front of him slightly below his shoulders. The shoham stones were set in them-one on the right shoulder strap and one on the left shoulder strap. The settings were placed at their ends in front of his shoulders, and the two golden chains were inserted into the two rings of the choshen at the two ends of its upper width-one on the right and one on the left. The two ends of the [right] chains were inserted into the settings on the right, and similarly the two ends of the left chains were inserted into the settings on the left shoulder strap. Thus, the choshen was suspended on the settings of the ephod in front of him [the Kohen Gadol] over his heart. There were two more rings on the two ends of the choshen, on the bottom of it. Opposite them [there were] two rings on the two shoulder straps from below, at its bottom end, which was attached to the belt. The rings of the choshen [were] opposite the rings of the ephod, lying on each other. He would fasten them [the rings] with a blue cord, inserted through the rings of the ephod and the choshen, attached to the band of the ephod, so that the bottom of the choshen would be attached to the band of the ephod, and it would not swing back and forth. ועשו את האפוד: אם באתי לפרש מעשה האפוד והחשן על סדר המקראות, הרי פירושן פרקים פרקים, וישגה הקורא בצרופן, לכך אני כותב מעשיהם כמות שהוא, למען ירוץ הקורא בו, ואחר כך אפרש על סדר המקראות. האפוד עשוי כמין סינר של נשים רוכבות סוסים, וחוגר אותו מאחוריו כנגד לבו למטה מאציליו, רחבו כמדת רוחב גבו של אדם ויותר ומגיע עד עקביו, והחשב מחובר בראשו על פני רחבו מעשה אורג, ומאריך לכאן ולכאן כדי להקיף ולחגור בו, והכתפות מחוברות בחשב אחד לימין ואחד לשמאל, מרוחקות זו מזו שיעור הבדלת כתפים, מאחורי הכהן לשני קצות רחבו של סינר, וכשזוקפן עומדות לו על שני כתפיו, והן כמין שתי רצועות עשויות ממין האפוד, ארוכות כדי שיעור לזקפן אצל צוארו מכאן ומכאן, ונקפלות לפניו למטה מכתפיו מעט, ואבני השהם קבועות בהם, אחת על כתף ימין ואחת על כתף שמאל, והמשבצות נתונות בראשיהם לפני כתפיו, ושתי עבותות הזהב תחובות בשתי טבעות שבחשן בשני קצות רחבו העליון, אחת לימין ואחת לשמאל, ושני ראשי השרשרת [הימנית] תקועין במשבצות לימין, וכן שני ראשי השרשרת השמאלית תקועין במשבצות שבכתף שמאל, נמצא החושן תלוי במשבצות האפוד על לבו מלפניו. ועוד שתי טבעות בשני קצות החשן בתחתיתו וכנגדם שתי טבעות בשתי כתפות האפוד מלמטה בראשו התחתון המחובר בחשב, טבעות החשן אל מול טבעות האפוד שוכבים זה על זה ומרכסן בפתיל תכלת תחוב בטבעות האפוד והחשן, שיהא תחתית החשן דבוק לחשב האפוד ולא יהא נד ונבדל, הולך וחוזר:
of gold, blue, purple, and crimson wool, and twisted fine linen: These five kinds [of substances] were twisted into each thread. They [the workers] flattened the gold into a sort of thin plate and cut cords out of them [the plates] and spun them, one thread of gold with six threads of blue wool, and one thread of gold with six threads of purple wool, and similarly with the crimson wool, and similarly with the linen, for the threads of all the kinds were doubled sixfold, and one thread of gold was [twisted] with each one [kind of thread]. Afterwards, he would twist them all together. Thus, their threads were doubled into twenty-eight strands. This is explained in tractate Yoma (72a), and it is derived from the following verse (Exod. 39:3): “They flattened out the sheets of gold and he cut cords [out of them], to work (the gold cords) into the blue wool, into the purple wool, etc.” We learn that a thread of gold was twisted with every kind [of thread]. זהב תכלת וארגמן תולעת שני ושש משזר: חמשת מינים הללו שזורין בכל חוט וחוט היו מרדדין את הזהב כמין טסין דקין וקוצצין פתילים מהם, וטווין אותן חוט של זהב עם ששה חוטים של תכלת, וחוט של זהב עם ששה חוטין של ארגמן, וכן בתולעת שני, וכן בשש, שכל המינין חוטן כפול ששה, וחוט של זהב עם כל אחד ואחד, ואחר כך שוזר את כולם כאחד, נמצא חוטן כפול עשרים ושמונה. וכן מפורש במסכת יומא (עב א), ולמד מן המקרא הזה (שמות לט ג) וירקעו את פחי הזהב וקצץ פתילים לעשות, את פתילי הזהב, בתוך התכלת ובתוך הארגמן וגו', למדנו שחוט של זהב שזור עם כל מין ומין:
the work of a master weaver: Heb. מַעִשֵׂה חוֹשֵׁב. I have already explained (Exod. 26:1) that this is the weaving of two “walls,” [and] that the figures of its two sides are unlike one another. מעשה חושב: כבר פירשתי (שמות כו א) שהוא אריגת שתי קירות שאין צורות שני עבריה דומות זו לזו:
7It shall have two connected shoulder straps at both its ends, and it shall be entirely connected. זשְׁתֵּ֧י כְתֵפֹ֣ת חֹֽבְרֹ֗ת יִֽהְיֶה־לּ֛וֹ אֶל־שְׁנֵ֥י קְצוֹתָ֖יו וְחֻבָּֽר:
at both its ends: [I.e.,] to the width of the ephod. For its width was only against the Kohen’s back, and its height extended opposite his elbows, which are called coudes in French, as it is said: “they shall not gird themselves in a place that sweats” (Ezek. 44:18). [I.e.,] they should not gird themselves in a place of perspiration, [namely] neither above their elbows nor below their waists, but opposite their elbows. -[from Zev. 18b] שתי כתפות וגו': הסינר מלמטה, וחשב האפוד היא החגורה וצמודה לו מלמעלה דוגמת סינר הנשים, ומגבו של כהן היו מחוברות בחשב. שתי חתיכות כמין שתי רצועות רחבות, אחת כנגד כל כתף וכתף, וזוקפן על שתי כתפותיו עד שנקפלות לפניו כנגד החזה, ועל ידי חבורן לטבעות החשן נאחזין מלפניו כנגד לבו שאין נופלות, כמו שמפורש בענין, והיו זקופות והולכות כנגד כתפיו, ושתי אבני השהם קבועות בהן, אחת בכל אחת:
and it shall be entirely connected: the ephod with those two shoulder straps of the ephod. He shall connect them [by sewing them] with a needle below [the shoulder straps] to the band, and he shall not weave them [together] with it, but weave them separately and then connect them. אל שני קצותיו: אל רחבו של אפוד, שלא היה רחבו אלא כנגד גבו של כהן, וגבהו עד כנגד האצילים שקורין קודי"ש בלעז [מרפקים] שנאמר (יחזקאל מד יח) לא יחגרו ביזע, אין חוגרין במקום זיעה, לא למעלה מאציליהם ולא למטה ממתניהם, אלא כנגד אציליהם:
8And its decorative band, which is above it, shall be of the same work, [emanating] from it: gold, blue, purple, and crimson wool, and twisted fine linen. חוְחֵ֤שֶׁב אֲפֻדָּתוֹ֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָלָ֔יו כְּמַֽעֲשֵׂ֖הוּ מִמֶּ֣נּוּ יִֽהְיֶ֑ה זָהָ֗ב תְּכֵ֧לֶת וְאַרְגָּמָ֛ן וְתוֹלַ֥עַת שָׁנִ֖י וְשֵׁ֥שׁ מָשְׁזָֽר:
And its decorative band: The belt, by which it [the ephod] decorates and enhances the kohen[’s appearance] and adorns him. וחשב אפודתו: וחגור שעל ידו הוא מאפדו ומתקנהו לכהן ומקשטו:
which is above it: Above, [i.e.,] at the edge of the apron was the belt. אשר עליו: למעלה בשפת הסינר, היא החגורה:
of the same work: Just as the weaving of the apron was the work of a master weaver and of five kinds, so was the weaving of the band the work of a master weaver and of five kinds [of material]. כמעשהו: כאריגת הסינר מעשה חושב ומחמשת מינים, כך אריגת החשב מעשה חושב ומחמשת מינין:
[emanating] from it: It shall be woven with it, and he shall not weave it separately and attach it. [Whereas the shoulder straps and the ephod were to be woven separately and then attached, the belt and the ephod were to be woven together from the start.] ממנו יהיה: עמו יהיה ארוג, ולא יארגנו לבד ויחברנו:
9And you shall take two shoham stones and engrave upon them the names of the sons of Israel. טוְלָ֣קַחְתָּ֔ אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֖י אַבְנֵי־שֹׁ֑הַם וּפִתַּחְתָּ֣ עֲלֵיהֶ֔ם שְׁמ֖וֹת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:
10Six of their names on one stone and the names of the remaining six on the second stone, according to their births. ישִׁשָּׁה֙ מִשְּׁמֹתָ֔ם עַ֖ל הָאֶ֣בֶן הָֽאֶחָ֑ת וְאֶת־שְׁמ֞וֹת הַשִּׁשָּׁ֧ה הַנּֽוֹתָרִ֛ים עַל־הָאֶ֥בֶן הַשֵּׁנִ֖ית כְּתֽוֹלְדֹתָֽם:
according to their births: According to the order in which they were born [i.e.,]: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, on the one; and on the second one, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin spelled full, [בִּנְיָמִין], for so it is written in the place of his birth (Gen. 35: 18) [totaling] twenty-five letters on each one [stone]. כתולדותם: כסדר שנולדו ראובן שמעון לוי יהודה דן נפתלי, על האחת, ועל השניה גד אשר יששכר זבולן יוסף בנימין מלא, שכן הוא כתוב במקום תולדתו, עשרים וחמש אותיות בכל אחת ואחת:
11[Similar to] the work of an engraver of gems, [similar to] the engravings of a seal, you shall engrave the two stones with the names of the sons of Israel; you shall make them enclosed in gold settings. יאמַֽעֲשֵׂ֣ה חָרַשׁ֘ אֶ֒בֶן֒ פִּתּוּחֵ֣י חֹתָ֗ם תְּפַתַּח֙ אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֣י הָֽאֲבָנִ֔ים עַל־שְׁמֹ֖ת בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל מֻֽסַבֹּ֛ת מִשְׁבְּצ֥וֹת זָהָ֖ב תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה אֹתָֽם:
[Similar to] the work of an engraver of gems: Heb. אֶבֶן מַעִשֵׂה חָרַשׁ. The work of a craftsman of precious stones. This [word] חָרַשׁ is connected to the following word. Therefore, it is vowelized with a “pattach” at the end, and likewise, “The carpenter (חָרַשׁ עֵצִים) stretched out a line” (Isa. 44:13). [This is like] חָרָשׁ שֶׁל עֵצִים. Likewise, “The iron smith (חָרַשׁ בַּרְזֶל)” (Isa. 44:12). All these are connected and are [therefore] vowelized with “pattach” s. מעשה חרש אבן: מעשה אומן של אבנים. חרש זה דבוק הוא לתיבה שלאחריו, ולפיכך הוא נקוד פתח בסופו, וכן (ישעיה מד יג) חרש עצים נטה קו, חרש של עצים. וכן (ישעיה מד יב) חרש ברזל מעצד, כל אלה דבוקים ופתוחים:
[similar to] the engravings of a seal: Heb. פִּךְתּוּחֵי חֹתָם, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: כְּתַב מְפָרָשׁ כִּגְלָף דְּעִיזְקָא [a clear script like the engraving of a signet]. The letters are engraved inwardly, as they engrave the seals of signets, which are [used] to seal letters, [in] a clear and explanatory script. פתוחי חותם: כתרגומו כתב מפרש כגלף דעזקא, חרוצות האותיות בתוכן, כמו שחורצין חותמי טבעות שהם לחתום אגרות, כתב ניכר ומפורש:
with the names: Heb. עַל-שְׁמֹת, בִּשְׁמוֹת. על שמות: כמו בשמות:
enclosed in…settings: The stones shall be enclosed in gold settings, that he would make the “seat” of the stone in gold, like a sort of hole according to the measurement of the stone, and sink it [the stone] into the setting. Thus, the setting would encircle the stone, and the settings would be attached to the shoulder straps of the ephod. מסבת משבצות: מוקפות האבנים במשבצות זהב, שעושה מושב האבן בזהב כמין גומא למדת האבן ומשקיעה במשבצות, נמצאת המשבצת סובבת את האבן סביב, ומחבר המשבצות בכתפות האפוד:
12And you shall put the two stones upon the shoulder straps of the ephod as stones of remembrance for the sons of Israel, and Aaron shall carry their names before the Lord upon his two shoulders as a remembrance. יבוְשַׂמְתָּ֞ אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֣י הָֽאֲבָנִ֗ים עַ֚ל כִּתְפֹ֣ת הָֽאֵפֹ֔ד אַבְנֵ֥י זִכָּרֹ֖ן לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְנָשָׂא֩ אַֽהֲרֹ֨ן אֶת־שְׁמוֹתָ֜ם לִפְנֵ֧י יְהֹוָ֛ה עַל־שְׁתֵּ֥י כְתֵפָ֖יו לְזִכָּרֹֽן:
as a remembrance: So that the Holy One, blessed is He, will see the [progenitors of the] tribes written before Him, and He will remember their righteousness. לזכרון: שיראה הקב"ה השבטים כתובים לפניו ויזכור צדקתם:
CHABAD - TODAY IN JUDAISM: Sunday, February 14, 2016 - Today is: Sunday, Adar I 5, 5776 · February 14, 2016
Daily Quote:
"And the pit was empty; there was no water in it" (Genesis 37:24). From the implication of what is said, "And the pit was empty," do I not know that there was no water in it? What then is taught by, "there was no water in it"? There was no water, but there were snakes and scorpions in it...[Talmud, Shabbat 22a]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tetzaveh, 1st Portion Exodus 27:20-28:12 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 27
20And you shall command the children of Israel, and they shall take to you pure olive oil, crushed for lighting, to kindle the lamps continually. כוְאַתָּ֞ה תְּצַוֶּ֣ה | אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְיִקְח֨וּ אֵלֶ֜יךָ שֶׁ֣מֶן זַ֥יִת זָ֛ךְ כָּתִ֖ית לַמָּא֑וֹר לְהַֽעֲלֹ֥ת נֵ֖ר תָּמִֽיד:
pure: Without sediment, as we learned in Men. (86a): “He allows it to ripen at the top of the olive tree, etc.” ואתה תצוה, זך: בלי שמרים, כמו ששנינו במנחות (פו א) מגרגרו בראש הזית וכו':
crushed: He must crush the olives in a mortar, but he may not grind them in a mill, so that they will not contain sediment. After he has extracted the first drop [of oil], he places them [the olives] into a mill and grinds them. The [resulting] second oil is unfit for the menorah but is fit for meal offerings, as it is said: “crushed for lighting,” but not crushed for meal offerings. -[from Men. 86a] כתית: הזיתים היה כותש במכתשת, ואינו טוחנן בריחים, כדי שלא יהו בו שמרים, ואחר שהוציא טפה ראשונה מכניסן לריחים וטוחנן, והשמן השני פסול למנורה וכשר למנחות, שנאמר כתית למאור, ולא כתית למנחות:
to kindle the lamps continually: Heb. לְהַעִלֹת, lit., to cause to rise. [The kohen] shall light it until the flame rises by itself. -[from Shab. 21a] להעלות נר תמיד: מדליק עד שתהא שלהבת עולה מאליה:
continually: Heb. תָּמִיד. [Since it burns] every night, it is called תָּמִיד, as you say: “a continual burnt offering” (עֹלַת תָּמִיד)” (Exod. 29:42, Num. 28:6), [which is called “continual”] although it is [offered up] only from day to day. Similarly, concerning the flat pan meal offering [of the Kohen Gadol, the word] תָּמִיד is mentioned although it is [offered up] only half in the morning and [the other] half in the evening. [The word] תָּמִיד mentioned concerning the showbread (Exod. 25:30), however, [literally] means from Sabbath to Sabbath [i.e., continually]. תמיד: כל לילה ולילה קרוי תמיד, כמו שאתה אומר (במדבר כח ו) עולת תמיד, ואינה אלא מיום ליום. וכן במנחת חביתין נאמר (ויקרא ו יג) תמיד, ואינה אלא מחציתה בבקר ומחציתה בערב. אבל תמיד האמור בלחם הפנים משבת לשבת הוא:
21In the Tent of Meeting, outside the dividing curtain that is in front of the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall set it up before the Lord from evening to morning; [it shall be] an everlasting statute for their generations, from the children of Israel. כאבְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵד֩ מִח֨וּץ לַפָּרֹ֜כֶת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־הָֽעֵדֻ֗ת יַֽעֲרֹךְ֩ אֹת֨וֹ אַֽהֲרֹ֧ן וּבָנָ֛יו מֵעֶ֥רֶב עַד־בֹּ֖קֶר לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה חֻקַּ֤ת עוֹלָם֙ לְדֹ֣רֹתָ֔ם מֵאֵ֖ת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:
from evening to morning: Give it its measure so that it will burn from evening to morning. And the Sages estimated [that this is] a half of a log [between 6 and 10.6 fl. oz.] for the long nights of Teveth, and similarly for all the nights. If any of it remains, it does not matter. [from Men. 89a] מערב עד בקר: תן לה מדתה שתהא דולקת מערב עד בקר, ושיערו חכמים חצי לוג ללילי טבת הארוכין, וכן לכל הלילות, ואם יותר אין בכך כלום:
Exodus Chapter 28
1And you bring near to yourself your brother Aaron, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel to serve Me [as kohanim]: Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar, Aaron's sons. אוְאַתָּ֡ה הַקְרֵ֣ב אֵלֶ֩יךָ֩ אֶת־אַֽהֲרֹ֨ן אָחִ֜יךָ וְאֶת־בָּנָ֣יו אִתּ֗וֹ מִתּ֛וֹךְ בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לְכַֽהֲנוֹ־לִ֑י אַֽהֲרֹ֕ן נָדָ֧ב וַֽאֲבִיה֛וּא אֶלְעָזָ֥ר וְאִֽיתָמָ֖ר בְּנֵ֥י אַֽהֲרֹֽן:
And you bring near to yourself your brother Aaron, and his sons with him: After you complete the work of the Mishkan. ואתה הקרב אליך: לאחר שתגמר מלאכת המשכן:
2You shall make holy garments for your brother Aaron, for honor and glory. בוְעָשִׂ֥יתָ בִגְדֵי־קֹ֖דֶשׁ לְאַֽהֲרֹ֣ן אָחִ֑יךָ לְכָב֖וֹד וּלְתִפְאָֽרֶת:
3And you shall speak to all the wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, and they shall make Aaron's garments to sanctify him, [so] that he serve Me [as a kohen]. גוְאַתָּ֗ה תְּדַבֵּר֙ אֶל־כָּל־חַכְמֵי־לֵ֔ב אֲשֶׁ֥ר מִלֵּאתִ֖יו ר֣וּחַ חָכְמָ֑ה וְעָשׂ֞וּ אֶת־בִּגְדֵ֧י אַֽהֲרֹ֛ן לְקַדְּשׁ֖וֹ לְכַֽהֲנוֹ־לִֽי:
to sanctify him, [so] that he serve Me [as a kohen]: Heb. לְקַדְּשׁוֹ לְכַהִנוֹ-לִי, to sanctify him, to initiate him into the kehunah through these garment [so] that he would be a kohen to Me. The expression of kehunah means service, serjanterie [or serventrie] in Old French. לקדשו לכהנו לי: לקדשו להכניסו בכהונה על ידי הבגדים שיהא כהן לי, ולשון כהונה שירות הוא, שוריינטריא"ה בלעז [שירות]:
4And these are the garments that they shall make: a choshen, an ephod, a robe, a tunic of checker work, a cap, and a sash. They shall make holy garments for your brother Aaron and for his sons to serve Me [as kohanim]. דוְאֵ֨לֶּה הַבְּגָדִ֜ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר יַֽעֲשׂ֗וּ ח֤שֶׁן וְאֵפוֹד֙ וּמְעִ֔יל וּכְתֹ֥נֶת תַּשְׁבֵּ֖ץ מִצְנֶ֣פֶת וְאַבְנֵ֑ט וְעָשׂ֨וּ בִגְדֵי־קֹ֜דֶשׁ לְאַֽהֲרֹ֥ן אָחִ֛יךָ וּלְבָנָ֖יו לְכַֽהֲנוֹ־לִֽי:
a choshen: An ornament opposite the heart. חשן: תכשיט כנגד הלב:
an ephod: I did not hear (that it was a garment) [i.e., I have no tradition concerning the ephod], and I did not find the explanation of its pattern in the Baraitha [Melecheth HaMishkan]. My heart tells me that he [the Kohen Gadol] was girded with it [the ephod] from behind, its width being like the width of an [average] man’s back, similar to a kind of apron called porzent [or pourceint], [a kind of] belt, [like an] apron [back to front] that princesses wear when they ride horseback. So it was made from below [i.e., for the lower part of the body], as it is said: “and David was girded with a linen ephod” (II Sam. 6:14). [Thus] we learn that the ephod was a belt. It is impossible, however, to say that it was only a belt, because it is said: “and he put the ephod on him,” and afterwards, “and he girded him with the band of the ephod (בְּחֵשֶׁב הָאֵפוֹד) ” (Lev. 8:7), which Onkelos renders: בְּהֶמְיַן אֵפוֹדָא. [Thus] we learn that the חֵשֶׁב was the band and the ephod was a separate decoration. It is also impossible to say that because of the two shoulder straps in it, it is called ephod, for it is said: “the two shoulder straps of the ephod” (verse 27). [Thus] we learn that the ephod was a separate entity, the shoulder straps were a separate entity, and the band was a separate entity. Therefore, I say that because of the apron below it is called ephod because he decorates and adorns himself with it, as it is said: “and he decorated him with it” (Lev. 8:7); the חֵשֶׁב is the band above it, to which the shoulder straps were attached. Moreover, my heart tells me that there is evidence that it is a kind of garment, for Jonathan rendered “and David was girded with a linen ephod” (II Sam. 6: 14) as כַּרְדּוּט דְּבוּץ and he renders likewise מְעִילִים as כַּרְדּוּטִין, in the narrative of Tamar, Absalom’s sister, “for in this manner the king’s virgin daughters dressed, in robes (מְעִילִים) ” (II Sam. 13:18). ואפוד: לא שמעתי ולא מצאתי בברייתא פירוש תבניתו, ולבי אומר לי שהוא חגור לו מאחוריו, רחבו כרוחב גב איש, כמין סינר שקורין פורציינ"ט בלעז [חגורה] שחוגרות השרות כשרוכבות על הסוסים, כך מעשהו מלמטה, שנאמר (שמואל ב ו יד) ודוד חגור אפוד בד, למדנו שהאפוד חגורה היא. ואי אפשר לומר שאין בו אלא חגורה לבדה, שהרי נאמר (ויקרא ח ז) ויתן עליו את האפוד, ואחר כך ויחגור אותו בחשב האפוד, ותרגם אונקלוס בהמיין אפודא, למדנו שהחשב הוא החגור, והאפוד שם תכשיט לבדו. ואי אפשר לומר שעל שם שתי הכתפות שבו הוא קרוי אפוד, שהרי נאמר (פסוק כז) שתי כתפות האפוד, למדנו שהאפוד שם לבד, והכתפות שם לבד, והחשב שם לבד. לכך אני אומר שעל שם הסינר של מטה קרוי אפוד, על שם שאופדו ומקשטו בו, כמו שנאמר (ויקרא ח ז) ויאפוד לו בו, והחשב הוא החגור שלמעלה הימנו, והכתפות קבועות בו. ועוד אומר לי לבי, שיש ראיה שהוא מין לבוש, שתרגם יונתן (שמואל ב' ו יד) ודוד חגור אפוד בד, כרדוט דבוץ. ותרגם כמו כן מעילים, כרדוטין, במעשה תמר אחות אבשלום (שמואל ב יג יח) כי כן תלבשנה בנות המלך הבתולות מעילים:
a robe: Heb. מְעִיל. It is a kind of tunic, as is the כְּתֹנֶת, only that the כְּתֹנֶת is [worn] next to his flesh and the מְעִיל is [what is] called the outside robe. ומעיל: הוא כמין חלוק, וכן הכתונת, אלא שהכתונת סמוך לבשרו ומעיל קרוי חלוק עליון:
of checker work: Heb. ךְתַּשְׁבֵּץ. Made of boxes (מִשְׁבְּצוֹת) for beauty. The boxes are similar to holes made in gold jewelry as a setting for precious stones and pearls, as it is said regarding the ephod stones: “enclosed in gold settings (מִשְׁבְּצוֹת) ” (verse 11), and in Old French it is called cha(s)tons, settings. [I.e., the boxes of the checker work on the tunic are like settings for precious gems.] תשבץ: עשויין משבצות לנוי, והמשבצות הן כמין גומות העשויות בתכשיטי זהב למושב קביעות אבנים טובות ומרגליות, כמו שנאמר באבני האפוד (פסוק יא) מוסבות משבצות זהב, ובלעז קוראין אותו קשטונ"ש [משבצות]:
a cap: Heb. מִצְנֶפֶת, a type of dome-shaped hat, called cofia in Old French, because elsewhere (verse 40) [the Torah] calls them מִגְבָּעוֹת, and the Targum [Onkelos] renders: כּוֹבָעִין. מצנפת: כמין כיפת כובע שקורין קויפ"א בלעז [שביס עשוי רשת], שהרי במקום אחר קורא להם (לט כח) מגבעות, ומתרגמינן כובעין:
and a sash: This is the belt on the tunic, and the ephod is the belt on the robe, as we find in the order they were put on: “and put upon him the tunic, girded him with the sash, clothed him with the robe, put upon him the ephod” (Lev. 8:7). ואבנט: היא חגורה על הכתונת, והאפוד חגורה על המעיל, כמו שמצינו בסדר לבישתן (ויקרא ח ז) ויתן עליו את הכתנת ויחגור אותו באבנט וילבש אותו את המעיל ויתן עליו את האפוד:
holy garments: From the offering sanctified for My name they shall make it. בגדי קדש: מתרומה המקודשת לשמי יעשו אותם:
5They shall take the gold, the blue, purple, and crimson wool, and the linen, הוְהֵם֙ יִקְח֣וּ אֶת־הַזָּהָ֔ב וְאֶת־הַתְּכֵ֖לֶת וְאֶת־הָֽאַרְגָּמָ֑ן וְאֶת־תּוֹלַ֥עַת הַשָּׁנִ֖י וְאֶת־הַשֵּֽׁשׁ:
They shall take: Those wise-hearted people, who are to make the garments, shall receive from the donors the gold and the blue wool from which to make the garments. והם יקחו: אותם חכמי לב שיעשו הבגדים, יקבלו מן המתנדבים את הזהב ואת התכלת לעשות מהן את הבגדים:
6and they shall make the ephod of gold, blue, purple, and crimson wool, and twisted fine linen, the work of a master weaver. ווְעָשׂ֖וּ אֶת־הָֽאֵפֹ֑ד זָ֠הָ֠ב תְּכֵ֨לֶת וְאַרְגָּמָ֜ן תּוֹלַ֧עַת שָׁנִ֛י וְשֵׁ֥שׁ מָשְׁזָ֖ר מַֽעֲשֵׂ֥ה חשֵֽׁב:
and they shall make the ephod: If I would try to explain the making of the ephod and the choshen according to the order of the verses, their explanation would be fragmentary and the reader would err in combining them. Therefore, I am writing [first] how they were made, as it was [i.e., in its entirety], so that the reader will be able to run through it [quickly]. Afterwards, I will explain it [how they were made] according to the sequence of the verses. The ephod was designed like a sort of apron worn by women who ride horseback [see Rashi on verse 4], and he [the Kohen Gadol] would gird [himself with] it from behind, opposite his heart, below his elbows, its width equaling the width of a man’s back and more, and it [the ephod] would reach his ankles. The belt was attached to the top of it across its width, [it was] the work of a weaver, and it extended on both sides in order to wrap [the Kohen Gadol] and gird [him] with it. The shoulder straps were attached to the belt-one to the right and one to the left from behind the Kohen [Gadol], at the two ends of the width of the apron. When he held them [i.e., the shoulder straps] upright, they stood [i.e., lay flat] on his two shoulders. They were like two straps made from the same material as the ephod [and they were] long enough to place them upright alongside his neck on either side. They were folded in front of him slightly below his shoulders. The shoham stones were set in them-one on the right shoulder strap and one on the left shoulder strap. The settings were placed at their ends in front of his shoulders, and the two golden chains were inserted into the two rings of the choshen at the two ends of its upper width-one on the right and one on the left. The two ends of the [right] chains were inserted into the settings on the right, and similarly the two ends of the left chains were inserted into the settings on the left shoulder strap. Thus, the choshen was suspended on the settings of the ephod in front of him [the Kohen Gadol] over his heart. There were two more rings on the two ends of the choshen, on the bottom of it. Opposite them [there were] two rings on the two shoulder straps from below, at its bottom end, which was attached to the belt. The rings of the choshen [were] opposite the rings of the ephod, lying on each other. He would fasten them [the rings] with a blue cord, inserted through the rings of the ephod and the choshen, attached to the band of the ephod, so that the bottom of the choshen would be attached to the band of the ephod, and it would not swing back and forth. ועשו את האפוד: אם באתי לפרש מעשה האפוד והחשן על סדר המקראות, הרי פירושן פרקים פרקים, וישגה הקורא בצרופן, לכך אני כותב מעשיהם כמות שהוא, למען ירוץ הקורא בו, ואחר כך אפרש על סדר המקראות. האפוד עשוי כמין סינר של נשים רוכבות סוסים, וחוגר אותו מאחוריו כנגד לבו למטה מאציליו, רחבו כמדת רוחב גבו של אדם ויותר ומגיע עד עקביו, והחשב מחובר בראשו על פני רחבו מעשה אורג, ומאריך לכאן ולכאן כדי להקיף ולחגור בו, והכתפות מחוברות בחשב אחד לימין ואחד לשמאל, מרוחקות זו מזו שיעור הבדלת כתפים, מאחורי הכהן לשני קצות רחבו של סינר, וכשזוקפן עומדות לו על שני כתפיו, והן כמין שתי רצועות עשויות ממין האפוד, ארוכות כדי שיעור לזקפן אצל צוארו מכאן ומכאן, ונקפלות לפניו למטה מכתפיו מעט, ואבני השהם קבועות בהם, אחת על כתף ימין ואחת על כתף שמאל, והמשבצות נתונות בראשיהם לפני כתפיו, ושתי עבותות הזהב תחובות בשתי טבעות שבחשן בשני קצות רחבו העליון, אחת לימין ואחת לשמאל, ושני ראשי השרשרת [הימנית] תקועין במשבצות לימין, וכן שני ראשי השרשרת השמאלית תקועין במשבצות שבכתף שמאל, נמצא החושן תלוי במשבצות האפוד על לבו מלפניו. ועוד שתי טבעות בשני קצות החשן בתחתיתו וכנגדם שתי טבעות בשתי כתפות האפוד מלמטה בראשו התחתון המחובר בחשב, טבעות החשן אל מול טבעות האפוד שוכבים זה על זה ומרכסן בפתיל תכלת תחוב בטבעות האפוד והחשן, שיהא תחתית החשן דבוק לחשב האפוד ולא יהא נד ונבדל, הולך וחוזר:
of gold, blue, purple, and crimson wool, and twisted fine linen: These five kinds [of substances] were twisted into each thread. They [the workers] flattened the gold into a sort of thin plate and cut cords out of them [the plates] and spun them, one thread of gold with six threads of blue wool, and one thread of gold with six threads of purple wool, and similarly with the crimson wool, and similarly with the linen, for the threads of all the kinds were doubled sixfold, and one thread of gold was [twisted] with each one [kind of thread]. Afterwards, he would twist them all together. Thus, their threads were doubled into twenty-eight strands. This is explained in tractate Yoma (72a), and it is derived from the following verse (Exod. 39:3): “They flattened out the sheets of gold and he cut cords [out of them], to work (the gold cords) into the blue wool, into the purple wool, etc.” We learn that a thread of gold was twisted with every kind [of thread]. זהב תכלת וארגמן תולעת שני ושש משזר: חמשת מינים הללו שזורין בכל חוט וחוט היו מרדדין את הזהב כמין טסין דקין וקוצצין פתילים מהם, וטווין אותן חוט של זהב עם ששה חוטים של תכלת, וחוט של זהב עם ששה חוטין של ארגמן, וכן בתולעת שני, וכן בשש, שכל המינין חוטן כפול ששה, וחוט של זהב עם כל אחד ואחד, ואחר כך שוזר את כולם כאחד, נמצא חוטן כפול עשרים ושמונה. וכן מפורש במסכת יומא (עב א), ולמד מן המקרא הזה (שמות לט ג) וירקעו את פחי הזהב וקצץ פתילים לעשות, את פתילי הזהב, בתוך התכלת ובתוך הארגמן וגו', למדנו שחוט של זהב שזור עם כל מין ומין:
the work of a master weaver: Heb. מַעִשֵׂה חוֹשֵׁב. I have already explained (Exod. 26:1) that this is the weaving of two “walls,” [and] that the figures of its two sides are unlike one another. מעשה חושב: כבר פירשתי (שמות כו א) שהוא אריגת שתי קירות שאין צורות שני עבריה דומות זו לזו:
7It shall have two connected shoulder straps at both its ends, and it shall be entirely connected. זשְׁתֵּ֧י כְתֵפֹ֣ת חֹֽבְרֹ֗ת יִֽהְיֶה־לּ֛וֹ אֶל־שְׁנֵ֥י קְצוֹתָ֖יו וְחֻבָּֽר:
at both its ends: [I.e.,] to the width of the ephod. For its width was only against the Kohen’s back, and its height extended opposite his elbows, which are called coudes in French, as it is said: “they shall not gird themselves in a place that sweats” (Ezek. 44:18). [I.e.,] they should not gird themselves in a place of perspiration, [namely] neither above their elbows nor below their waists, but opposite their elbows. -[from Zev. 18b] שתי כתפות וגו': הסינר מלמטה, וחשב האפוד היא החגורה וצמודה לו מלמעלה דוגמת סינר הנשים, ומגבו של כהן היו מחוברות בחשב. שתי חתיכות כמין שתי רצועות רחבות, אחת כנגד כל כתף וכתף, וזוקפן על שתי כתפותיו עד שנקפלות לפניו כנגד החזה, ועל ידי חבורן לטבעות החשן נאחזין מלפניו כנגד לבו שאין נופלות, כמו שמפורש בענין, והיו זקופות והולכות כנגד כתפיו, ושתי אבני השהם קבועות בהן, אחת בכל אחת:
and it shall be entirely connected: the ephod with those two shoulder straps of the ephod. He shall connect them [by sewing them] with a needle below [the shoulder straps] to the band, and he shall not weave them [together] with it, but weave them separately and then connect them. אל שני קצותיו: אל רחבו של אפוד, שלא היה רחבו אלא כנגד גבו של כהן, וגבהו עד כנגד האצילים שקורין קודי"ש בלעז [מרפקים] שנאמר (יחזקאל מד יח) לא יחגרו ביזע, אין חוגרין במקום זיעה, לא למעלה מאציליהם ולא למטה ממתניהם, אלא כנגד אציליהם:
8And its decorative band, which is above it, shall be of the same work, [emanating] from it: gold, blue, purple, and crimson wool, and twisted fine linen. חוְחֵ֤שֶׁב אֲפֻדָּתוֹ֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָלָ֔יו כְּמַֽעֲשֵׂ֖הוּ מִמֶּ֣נּוּ יִֽהְיֶ֑ה זָהָ֗ב תְּכֵ֧לֶת וְאַרְגָּמָ֛ן וְתוֹלַ֥עַת שָׁנִ֖י וְשֵׁ֥שׁ מָשְׁזָֽר:
And its decorative band: The belt, by which it [the ephod] decorates and enhances the kohen[’s appearance] and adorns him. וחשב אפודתו: וחגור שעל ידו הוא מאפדו ומתקנהו לכהן ומקשטו:
which is above it: Above, [i.e.,] at the edge of the apron was the belt. אשר עליו: למעלה בשפת הסינר, היא החגורה:
of the same work: Just as the weaving of the apron was the work of a master weaver and of five kinds, so was the weaving of the band the work of a master weaver and of five kinds [of material]. כמעשהו: כאריגת הסינר מעשה חושב ומחמשת מינים, כך אריגת החשב מעשה חושב ומחמשת מינין:
[emanating] from it: It shall be woven with it, and he shall not weave it separately and attach it. [Whereas the shoulder straps and the ephod were to be woven separately and then attached, the belt and the ephod were to be woven together from the start.] ממנו יהיה: עמו יהיה ארוג, ולא יארגנו לבד ויחברנו:
9And you shall take two shoham stones and engrave upon them the names of the sons of Israel. טוְלָ֣קַחְתָּ֔ אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֖י אַבְנֵי־שֹׁ֑הַם וּפִתַּחְתָּ֣ עֲלֵיהֶ֔ם שְׁמ֖וֹת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:
10Six of their names on one stone and the names of the remaining six on the second stone, according to their births. ישִׁשָּׁה֙ מִשְּׁמֹתָ֔ם עַ֖ל הָאֶ֣בֶן הָֽאֶחָ֑ת וְאֶת־שְׁמ֞וֹת הַשִּׁשָּׁ֧ה הַנּֽוֹתָרִ֛ים עַל־הָאֶ֥בֶן הַשֵּׁנִ֖ית כְּתֽוֹלְדֹתָֽם:
according to their births: According to the order in which they were born [i.e.,]: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, on the one; and on the second one, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin spelled full, [בִּנְיָמִין], for so it is written in the place of his birth (Gen. 35: 18) [totaling] twenty-five letters on each one [stone]. כתולדותם: כסדר שנולדו ראובן שמעון לוי יהודה דן נפתלי, על האחת, ועל השניה גד אשר יששכר זבולן יוסף בנימין מלא, שכן הוא כתוב במקום תולדתו, עשרים וחמש אותיות בכל אחת ואחת:
11[Similar to] the work of an engraver of gems, [similar to] the engravings of a seal, you shall engrave the two stones with the names of the sons of Israel; you shall make them enclosed in gold settings. יאמַֽעֲשֵׂ֣ה חָרַשׁ֘ אֶ֒בֶן֒ פִּתּוּחֵ֣י חֹתָ֗ם תְּפַתַּח֙ אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֣י הָֽאֲבָנִ֔ים עַל־שְׁמֹ֖ת בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל מֻֽסַבֹּ֛ת מִשְׁבְּצ֥וֹת זָהָ֖ב תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה אֹתָֽם:
[Similar to] the work of an engraver of gems: Heb. אֶבֶן מַעִשֵׂה חָרַשׁ. The work of a craftsman of precious stones. This [word] חָרַשׁ is connected to the following word. Therefore, it is vowelized with a “pattach” at the end, and likewise, “The carpenter (חָרַשׁ עֵצִים) stretched out a line” (Isa. 44:13). [This is like] חָרָשׁ שֶׁל עֵצִים. Likewise, “The iron smith (חָרַשׁ בַּרְזֶל)” (Isa. 44:12). All these are connected and are [therefore] vowelized with “pattach” s. מעשה חרש אבן: מעשה אומן של אבנים. חרש זה דבוק הוא לתיבה שלאחריו, ולפיכך הוא נקוד פתח בסופו, וכן (ישעיה מד יג) חרש עצים נטה קו, חרש של עצים. וכן (ישעיה מד יב) חרש ברזל מעצד, כל אלה דבוקים ופתוחים:
[similar to] the engravings of a seal: Heb. פִּךְתּוּחֵי חֹתָם, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: כְּתַב מְפָרָשׁ כִּגְלָף דְּעִיזְקָא [a clear script like the engraving of a signet]. The letters are engraved inwardly, as they engrave the seals of signets, which are [used] to seal letters, [in] a clear and explanatory script. פתוחי חותם: כתרגומו כתב מפרש כגלף דעזקא, חרוצות האותיות בתוכן, כמו שחורצין חותמי טבעות שהם לחתום אגרות, כתב ניכר ומפורש:
with the names: Heb. עַל-שְׁמֹת, בִּשְׁמוֹת. על שמות: כמו בשמות:
enclosed in…settings: The stones shall be enclosed in gold settings, that he would make the “seat” of the stone in gold, like a sort of hole according to the measurement of the stone, and sink it [the stone] into the setting. Thus, the setting would encircle the stone, and the settings would be attached to the shoulder straps of the ephod. מסבת משבצות: מוקפות האבנים במשבצות זהב, שעושה מושב האבן בזהב כמין גומא למדת האבן ומשקיעה במשבצות, נמצאת המשבצת סובבת את האבן סביב, ומחבר המשבצות בכתפות האפוד:
12And you shall put the two stones upon the shoulder straps of the ephod as stones of remembrance for the sons of Israel, and Aaron shall carry their names before the Lord upon his two shoulders as a remembrance. יבוְשַׂמְתָּ֞ אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֣י הָֽאֲבָנִ֗ים עַ֚ל כִּתְפֹ֣ת הָֽאֵפֹ֔ד אַבְנֵ֥י זִכָּרֹ֖ן לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְנָשָׂא֩ אַֽהֲרֹ֨ן אֶת־שְׁמוֹתָ֜ם לִפְנֵ֧י יְהֹוָ֛ה עַל־שְׁתֵּ֥י כְתֵפָ֖יו לְזִכָּרֹֽן:
as a remembrance: So that the Holy One, blessed is He, will see the [progenitors of the] tribes written before Him, and He will remember their righteousness. לזכרון: שיראה הקב"ה השבטים כתובים לפניו ויזכור צדקתם:
---------------------
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 29 - 34
• Hebrew text
• English text• Chapter 29
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 29 - 34
• Hebrew text
• English text• Chapter 29
The Name of God appears eighteen times in this psalm, corresponding to which our Sages established eighteen blessings-the Amidah. The entire psalm can be interpreted as referring to the giving of the Torah and the ingathering of the exiles.
1. A psalm by David. Render to the Lord, children of the mighty, render to the Lord honor and strength.
2. Render to the Lord the honor due to His Name; bow down to the Lord in resplendent holiness.
3. The voice of the Lord is over the waters, the God of glory thunders; the Lord is over mighty waters.
4. The voice of the Lord resounds with might; the voice of the Lord resounds with majesty.
5. The voice of the Lord breaks cedars; the Lord shatters the cedars of Lebanon.
6. He makes them leap like a calf, Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox.
7. The voice of the Lord strikes flames of fire.
8. The voice of the Lord makes the desert tremble; the Lord causes the desert of Kadesh to tremble.
9. The voice of the Lord causes the does to calve, and strips the forests bare; and in His Sanctuary all proclaim His glory.
10. The Lord sat [as King] at the Flood; the Lord will sit as King forever.
11. The Lord will give strength to His people; the Lord will bless His people with peace.
Chapter 30
This psalm teaches one not to be distressed if God visits suffering upon him in this world, for only through suffering can one enter the World to Come. Even one of great spiritual stature should realize that his stability is not guaranteed, but that all is in the hands of God.
1. A psalm, a song of dedication of the House, by David.
2. I exalt You, Lord, for You have uplifted me, and did not allow my enemies to rejoice over me.
3. Lord, my God, I cried out to You, and You healed me.
4. Lord, You have brought up my soul from the grave; You have kept me alive, that I should not descend to the pit.
5. Sing to the Lord, you His pious ones, and praise His holy Name.
6. For His wrath endures but for a moment, when He is conciliated there is [long] life; when one retires at night weeping, joy will come in the morning.
7. In my security I thought, "I shall never falter.”
8. Lord, by Your favor You have made my mountain stand strong; when You concealed Your countenance I was alarmed.
9. I called to You, O Lord, and I made supplication to my Lord:
10. What profit is there in my death, in my going down to the grave? Can dust praise You? Can it proclaim Your truth
11. Lord, hear and be gracious to me; Lord, be a help to me.
12. You have turned my mourning into dancing; You have undone my sackcloth and girded me with joy.
13. Therefore my soul shall sing to You, and not be silent; Lord my God, I will praise You forever.
Chapter 31
Composed by a destitute and oppressed David, running from Saul while placing his trust in God, this psalm instructs man to put his trust in God alone.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. In You I have taken shelter, O Lord, I shall never be shamed; rescue me in Your righteousness.
3. Turn Your ear to me, save me quickly; be to me a rock of refuge, a fortress to deliver me.
4. For You are my rock and my fortress; for the sake of Your Name, direct me and lead me.
5. Remove me from the net they planted for me, for You are my stronghold.
6. I entrust my spirit into Your hand; You will redeem me, Lord, God of truth.
7. I despise those who anticipate worthless vanities; but I trust in the Lord.
8. I will rejoice and delight in Your kindness, for You have seen my affliction; You know the troubles of my soul.
9. You have not delivered me into the hand of the enemy; You have set my feet on spacious ground.
10. Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I am in distress; my eye wastes away from vexation-my soul and my stomach.
11. For my life is spent in sorrow, my years in sighing; my strength fails because of my iniquity, and my bones are wasted away.
12. Because of my adversaries I have become a disgrace-exceedingly to my neighbors, and a dread to my friends; those who see me outside flee from me.
13. Like a dead man, I was forgotten from the heart; I became like a lost vessel.
14. For I have heard the slander of many, terror on every side, when they assembled together against me and plotted to take my life.
15. But I trusted in You, O Lord; I said, "You are my God.”
16. My times are in Your hand; save me from the hands of my enemies and pursuers.
17. Shine Your countenance upon Your servant; deliver me in Your kindness.
18. O Lord, let me not be ashamed, for I have called You; let the wicked be shamed, let them be silent to the grave.
19. Let the lips of falsehood-which speak insolently against the righteous, with arrogance and contempt-be struck dumb.
20. How abundant is Your good that You have hidden for those who fear You; in the presence of man, You have acted for those who take refuge in You.
21. Conceal them from the haughtiness of man, in the shelter of Your countenance; hide them in a shelter from the strife of tongues.
22. Blessed is the Lord, for He has been wondrous in His kindness to me in a besieged city.
23. I said in my panic, "I am cut off from before Your eyes!" But in truth, You heard the voice of my pleas when I cried to You.
24. Love the Lord, all His pious ones! The Lord preserves the faithful, and repays with exactness those who act haughtily.
25. Be strong and fortify your hearts, all who put their hope in the Lord!
Chapter 32
This psalm speaks of forgiveness of sin, and of the good fortune of one who repents and confesses to God wholeheartedly.
1. By David, a maskil.1Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
2. Fortunate is the man to whom the Lord does not reckon his sin, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.
3. When I was silent, my limbs wore away through my wailing all day long.
4. For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; my marrow became [dry] as the droughts of summer, Selah.
5. My sin I made known to You, my iniquity I did not cover. I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord," and You have forgiven the iniquity of my transgression forever.
6. For this let every pious man pray to You, at a time when You may be found; indeed, the flood of many waters will not reach him.
7. You are a refuge to me; protect me from distress; surround me with songs of deliverance forever.
8. I will enlighten you and educate you in the path you should go; I will advise you with what I have seen.
9. Be not like a horse, like a mule, senseless, that must be muzzled with bit and bridle when being adorned, so that it not come near you.
10. Many are the agonies of the wicked, but he who trusts in the Lord is surrounded by kindness.
11. Rejoice in the Lord and exult, you righteous ones! Sing joyously, all you upright of heart!
FOOTNOTES
1.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
Chapter 33
This psalm teaches the righteous and upright to praise God. For the more one knows of the Torah's wisdom, the more should he praise God, for he knows and understands His greatness.
1. Sing joyously to the Lord, you righteous ones; it is fitting for the upright to offer praise.
2. Extol the Lord with a harp; sing to Him with a ten-stringed lyre.
3. Sing to Him a new song; play well with sounds of jubilation.
4. For the word of the Lord is just; all His deeds are done in faithfulness.
5. He loves righteousness and justice; the kindness of the Lord fills the earth.
6. By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their hosts.
7. He gathers the waters of the sea like a mound; He places the deep waters in vaults.
8. Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world tremble before Him.
9. For He spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it endured.
10. The Lord has annulled the counsel of nations; He has foiled the schemes of peoples.
11. The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the thoughts of His heart throughout all generations.
12. Fortunate is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people He chose as a heritage for Himself.
13. The Lord looks down from heaven; He beholds all mankind.
14. From His dwelling-place He looks intently upon all the inhabitants of the earth.
15. It is He Who fashions the hearts of them all, Who perceives all their actions.
16. The king is not saved by a great army, nor a warrior rescued by great might.
17. The horse is a false guarantee for victory; with all its great strength it offers no escape.
18. But the eye of the Lord is directed toward those who fear Him, toward those who hope for His kindness,
19. to save their soul from death and to sustain them during famine.
20. Our soul yearns for the Lord; He is our help and our shield.
21. For our heart shall rejoice in Him, for we have put our trust in His Holy Name.
22. May Your kindness, Lord, be upon us, as we have placed our hope in You.
Chapter 34
This psalm tells of when David was in grave danger while at the palace of Achish, brother of Goliath. David acted like a madman, letting spittle run down his beard, and writing on the doors: "Achish, king of Gath, owes me one hundred thousand gold coins," leading Achish to eject him from the palace. In his joy, David composed this psalm in alphabetical sequence.
1. By David, when he feigned insanity before Avimelech,1 who then drove him away, and he left.
2. I bless the Lord at all times; His praise is always in my mouth.
3. My soul glories in the Lord; let the humble hear it and rejoice.
4. Exalt the Lord with me, and let us extol His Name together.
5. I sought the Lord and He answered me; He delivered me from all my fears.
6. Those who look to Him are radiant; their faces are never humiliated.
7. This poor man called, and the Lord heard; He delivered him from all his tribulations.
8. The angel of the Lord camps around those who fear Him, and rescues them.
9. Taste and see that the Lord is good; fortunate is the man who trusts in Him.
10. Fear the Lord, you His holy ones, for those who fear Him suffer no want.
11. Young lions may want and hunger, but those who seek the Lord shall not lack any good thing.
12. Come, children, listen to me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord.
13. Who is the man who desires life, who loves long life wherein to see goodness?
14. Guard your tongue from evil, and your lips from speaking deceit.
15. Turn away from evil and do good, seek peace and pursue it.
16. The eyes of the Lord are directed toward the righteous, and His ears toward their cry.
17. The wrath of the Lord is upon the evildoers, to excise their memory from the earth.
18. But when they [repent and] cry out, the Lord hears, and saves them from all their troubles.
19. The Lord is close to the broken-hearted, and saves those with a crushed spirit.
20. Many are the afflictions of a righteous person, but the Lord rescues him from them all.
21. He protects all his bones; not one of them is broken.
22. Evil brings death upon the wicked, and the enemies of the righteous are condemned.
23. The Lord redeems the soul of His servants; all who take shelter in Him are not condemned.
FOOTNOTES
1.All Philistine kings are referred to by the name Avimelech (Rashi).
---------------------
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 27
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 27
• Lessons in Tanya• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Sunday, Adar I 5, 5776 · February 14, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 27
ושני מיני נחת רוח לפניו יתברך למעלה
For there are two kinds of Divine pleasure:
אחת, מביטול הסטרא אחרא לגמרי, ואתהפכא ממרירו למתקא ומחשוכא לנהורא, על ידי הצדיקים
one, from the complete annihilation of the sitra achra, and the conversion of bitter to sweet and of darkness to light (— the former referring to the emotional faculties of the animal soul, and the latter to its mental faculties),which is accomplished by tzaddikim;
והשנית, כד אתכפיא הסטרא אחרא בעודה בתקפה וגבורתה, ומגביה עצמה כנשר
and the second: when the sitra achra is subdued while it is still at its strongest and most powerful, soaring like an eagle,
ומשם מורידה ה׳ באתערותא דלתתא על ידי הבינונים
and from this height G‑d topples it in response to human initiative i.e., as a result of one’s efforts at subduing thesitra achra in his soul. This is accomplished by Beinonim.
Each of the two aforementioned categories — those who were “created righteous” and who were “created wicked” — brings about one of these two kinds of Divine gratification.
וזהו שאמר הכתוב: ועשה לי מטעמים כאשר אהבתי
This is alluded to in the verse, 1 “And make me delicacies, such as I love,”
מטעמים לשון רבים, שני מיני נחת רוח
where the word matamim (“delicacies”) is written in the plural, indicating two kinds of pleasure.
והוא מאמר השכינה לבניה כללות ישראל, כדפירש בתיקונים
These words are the charge of the Shechinah to its children, the community of Israel, as explained inTikkunei Zohar — that with these words G‑d asks of the Jewish people to please Him with their divine service.
וכמו שבמטעמים גשמיים, דרך משל, יש שני מיני מעדנים
Just as with material food, there are two kinds of delicacies—
אחד, ממאכלים ערבים ומתוקים, והשני מדברים חריפים או חמוצים
one of sweet and luscious foods, and the other of sharp or sour articles which are unpleasant to eat in their natural state,
רק שהם מתובלים ומתוקנים היטב עד שנעשו מעדנים להשיב הנפש
but have been well spiced and prepared so that they become delicacies which revive the soul — so too are there two kinds of spiritual delicacies.
One is provided by tzaddikim, who are occupied solely with matters that are “good” and “sweet” — holy matters. Having conquered the evil of their animal soul, they no longer need grapple with the sitra achra. Their divine service consists of increasing the light of holiness. The second kind of delicacy is provided by Beinonim, who are occupied with “bitter” matters, with battling against the sitra achra in their soul, and with the evil thoughts that it spawns.
וזהו שאמר הכתוב: כל פעל ה׳ למענהו, וגם רשע ליום רעה
This is indicated in the verse, 2 “The L-rd has made everything for His sake; even the wicked for the day of evil.”
How can it be said that the rasha was created for G‑d’s sake?
פירוש: שישוב מרשעו ויעשה הרע שלו יום ואור למעלה
This means, however, that he should repent of his evil, and turn his evil into “day” and light above,
כד אתכפיא סטרא אחרא ואסתלק יקרא דקודשא בריך הוא לעילא
when the sitra achra is subdued, and the glory of G‑d is uplifted on high.
Thus, the meaning of the words “even the wicked for the day of evil” is that the purpose of the wicked is to transform the “evil” into “day”.
* * *
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Bereishit 27:4. |
| 2. | Mishlei 16:4. |
---------------------
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Sunday, Adar I 5, 5776 · February 14, 2016
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 336
Incest with a Daughter
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's daughter.
The Torah doesn't explicitly mention this prohibition—for if incest with a granddaughter is forbidden, how much more so incest with a daughter. And the Sages deduced from the wording of the verses that incest with a daughter is biblically prohibited.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 335
Incest with a Daughter's Daughter
"The nakedness of . . . [or] your daughter's daughter you shall not uncover their nakedness, for they are your own nakedness"—Leviticus 18:10.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's daughter's daughter.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 337
Incest with a Mother-in-Law or Wife's Daughter
"You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter"—Leviticus 18:17.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's wife's mother or daughter.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 338
Incest with a Wife's Paternal Grandmother or a Wife's Son's Daughter
"...her son's daughter..."—Leviticus 18:17.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's wife's paternal grandmother or one's wife's son's daughter
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 339
Incest with a Wife's Maternal Grandmother or a Wife's Daughter's Daughter
"...and her daughter's daughter you shall not marry"—Leviticus 18:17.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's wife's maternal grandmother or one's wife's daughter's daughter
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Sunday, Adar I 5, 5776 · February 14, 2016Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 336
Incest with a Daughter
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's daughter.
The Torah doesn't explicitly mention this prohibition—for if incest with a granddaughter is forbidden, how much more so incest with a daughter. And the Sages deduced from the wording of the verses that incest with a daughter is biblically prohibited.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Incest with a Daughter
Negative Commandment 336
Translated by Berel Bell
The 336th prohibition is that one is forbidden from having relations with one's daughter.
This mitzvah is not explicitly stated in the Torah; it does not say, "do not commit incest with your daughter," for example. The Torah already prohibited relations with one's son's daughter and one's daughter's daughter, although they are more remotely related. It is therefore obvious [that a daughter is prohibited] and it is not mentioned.
In tractate Yevamos it is said, "the actual prohibition of [incest with] a daughter is learned by means of derivation,1 as Rava said, 'Rabbi Yitzchok bar Avdimi said to me: "compare the two occurrences of the word heinah [they are] and the two occurrences of the word zimah [perversion].' "
The explanation of this passage: regarding the incestual prohibition of one's son's daughter and one's daughter's daughter, the verse says,2 "for they are [heina] your own nakedness." Regarding the prohibition [of marrying] a woman and her daughter, son's daughter, or daughter's daughter, the verse says,3 "since they are [heinah] relatives, it is perversion."
[Since both verses have the word heinah, we can use the principle of gezeirah shavah,4 and compare the two verses:] just as where there is a prohibition [against marrying] a woman together with her son's daughter or daughter's daughter, the same applies to her daughter5 — so too where there is a prohibition [from having relations with] one's son's daughter or daughter's daughter, the same applies to one's daughter.6
Regarding the appropriate punishment, the verse states,7 "if a man marries a woman and her mother, it is perversion [zimah], and both he and they8 shall be burned with fire." So too, the punishment [for marrying] a woman and her daughter's daughter or son's daughter is burning, since regarding them the verse9 says zimah,10 just as it does by a woman and her daughter.11
Tractate Kerisus12 says, "do not treat a gezeirah shavah lightly, because [the prohibition of incest with] a daughter is part of the main body of the Torah,13 and nevertheless the verse does not teach it to us [explicitly] except through a gezeirah shavah14 — 'compare the two occurrences of the word heinah and the two occurrences of the word zimah.' "
Think closely into the wording of the Sages, "the verse does not teach it to us," rather than, "we have not learned it." They said it in this way because all teachings of this category have been handed down to us through "The Emissary,"15 and they are part of Torah tradition, as we explained in the introduction to our explanation of the Mishneh.
The verse does not mention this prohibition explicitly because it can be derived from a gezeirah shavah. This is their intention in saying, "the verse does not teach it to us [explicitly] except through a gezeirah shavah." And their statement, "main body of the Torah" is sufficient [to teach us that this mitzvah counts as one of the 613].
The conclusion of this discussion is that one who transgresses the prohibition of [incest with] one's daughter, daughter's daughter, or son's daughter is punished by s'reifah.16 If the act was intentional, but no one knows of the transgression, or there was no valid testimony, the punishment is kares.17 If one of them transgressed unintentionally, that person must bring a sin-offering.18
FOOTNOTES
1.Not explicitly stated, as are the other incestual relationships, but learned by one of the principles of Torah derivation.
2.Lev. 18:10.
3.Lev. 18:17.
4.There is an Oral Tradition handed down from the time the Torah was given on Mt. Sinai, that when the same word occurs in two different contexts, the two laws can be compared. There must be a tradition for each particular instance.
5.As stated clearly in the verse, Lev. 18:17.
6.Until here is the Rambam's explanation of the Gemara's statement, "compare the two occurrences of the word heinah." Now he explains the meaning of, "the two occurrences of the word zimah."
7.Lev. 20:14.
8.Actually only the second one is executed; see Hilchos Isurei Biyah, 2:7.
9.Lev. 18:17.
10.See Heller edition, note 25.
11.I.e. a mother and her daughter, as in Lev. 20:14.
12.5a.
13.In the Second Introductory Principle, the Rambam stated that if a law is only derived, it does not count as one of the 613 mitzvos. However, there he says that when this expression — "main body of the Torah" [gufei Torah] — is used, the law does count as one of the 613. This is evidently his intention in quoting this passage.
14.Rather than with an explicit verse.
15.I.e. Moshe Rabbenu. If, however, the expression, "we have not learned" was used, this could imply that a gezeirah shavah could be derived by the Sages themselves. See Yad Halevi, note 5.
16.I.e. pouring molten metal down the person's throat. See P228.
17.See N320, note 9.
18.Ibid. note 12.
------------------------------------Negative Commandment 335
Incest with a Daughter's Daughter
"The nakedness of . . . [or] your daughter's daughter you shall not uncover their nakedness, for they are your own nakedness"—Leviticus 18:10.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's daughter's daughter.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Incest with a Daughter's Daughter
Negative Commandment 335
Translated by Berel Bell
The 335th prohibition is that one is forbidden from having relations with one's daughter's daughter.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not commit incest with [your son's daughter or] your daughter's daughter, for they are your own nakedness.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 18:10.
-------------------------------------Negative Commandment 337
Incest with a Mother-in-Law or Wife's Daughter
"You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter"—Leviticus 18:17.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's wife's mother or daughter.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Incest with a Mother-in-Law or Wife's Daughter
Negative Commandment 337
Translated by Berel Bell
The 337th prohibition is that one is forbidden from having relations with a woman and her daughter.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "do not commit incest with a woman and her daughter."
One who transgresses this prohibition — i.e. one of them is his wife, and he has relations with the other — and does so intentionally, is punished by s'reifa2 if there is acceptable testimony, in addition to kares.3 If he transgressed unintentionally, he must bring a sin-offering.4
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 18:17.
2.See note to N336.
3.See N320, note 9.
4.Ibid. note 12.
------------------------------------Negative Commandment 338
Incest with a Wife's Paternal Grandmother or a Wife's Son's Daughter
"...her son's daughter..."—Leviticus 18:17.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's wife's paternal grandmother or one's wife's son's daughter
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Incest with a Wife's Paternal Grandmother or a Wife's Son's Daughter
Negative Commandment 338
Translated by Berel Bell
The 338th prohibition is that one is forbidden from having relations with a woman and her son's daughter.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "[do not commit incest with a woman and her daughter.] Do not even take her son's daughter."
For this prohibition, too, the punishment is s'reifah and kares for an intentional transgression, and a sin-offering if unintentional.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 18:17.
------------------------------------Negative Commandment 339
Incest with a Wife's Maternal Grandmother or a Wife's Daughter's Daughter
"...and her daughter's daughter you shall not marry"—Leviticus 18:17.
It is forbidden to have incestuous relations with one's wife's maternal grandmother or one's wife's daughter's daughter
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Incest with a Wife's Maternal Grandmother or a Wife's Daughter's Daughter
Negative Commandment 339
Translated by Berel Bell
The 339th prohibition is that one is forbidden from having relations with a woman and her daughter's daughter.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "[do not commit incest with a woman and her daughter. Do not even take her son's daughter] or her daughter's daughter."
For this prohibition the punishment is kares and s'reifah for an intentional transgression, and a sin-offering if unintentional.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid.
--------------------------------------
• 1 Chapter: Bikkurim Bikkurim - Chapter 12 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Bikkurim - Chapter 12
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Bikkurim - Chapter 12
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment1 for every Jewish man2 to redeem the first [male]3 issue of a donkey with a seh. If he does not desire to redeem it, it is a mitzvah for him to behead it,4 as [Exodus 13:13] states: "The first issue of a donkey you shall redeem with a seh.5 If you do not redeem it, you shall decapitate it."
Halacha 2
The seh with which it is redeemed is given to the priest, as [Numbers 18:15] states: "All first issues of the womb... and the firstborn of an impure animal you shall redeem."8
Halacha 3
The "impure animal" mentioned in the verse refers only to donkeys.9
Halacha 4
It is forbidden to benefit from the first issue of a donkey until it is redeemed. If it is sold before it is redeemed, the money received for it is forbidden.10 If it died before it was redeemed or it was decapitated, it should be buried, because it is forbidden to benefit from it even after its decapitation, since it was not redeemed. Therefore if he did not redeem it, but instead gave the first issue of the donkey itself to the priest, it is forbidden for the priest to benefit from it until he redeems it with a seh and takes the seh for himself11 or he decapitates it and buries it.
The priests are suspect regarding this matter.12 Hence, it is forbidden for an Israelite to give the first issue of a donkey to a priest unless the priest redeems it in his presence.
Halacha 5
When a person set aside [a seh] for the redemption of a donkey and it died before he gave it to the priest, he is not liable to replace it.13 Instead, he should give the corpse to the priest to benefit from.14 If the first issue of the donkey dies after it was redeemed, he should give the seh to the priest.15 It is permitted to benefit from [the donkey's corpse,] because it has been redeemed.
Halacha 6
Halacha 7
If he does not desire to redeem [the firstling donkey], he should decapitate it with a butcher's hatchet18 from behind,19 as [Exodus 13:13] states: "If you do not redeem it, you should decapitate it." One may not kill it with a staff, a reed, an axe, or a saw, only with a hatchet. One may not place it in a room and lock the door until it dies, for [the verse] states: "And you shall decapitate it."
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
One should not redeem [a firstling donkey] with a seh that resembles another species. If one redeems it in that manner, the redemption is effective.22 One may use a ben pekua23 for the redemption, but not a consecrated animal that was disqualified [and redeemed], for [Deuteronomy 15:22] equates such animals with "the deer and the hart." Just as a deer and a hart may not be used for this redemption,24 so too, a consecrated animal that was disqualified may not be used.
Halacha 10
One may redeem [a firstling donkey] with a seh, whether a male or female, whether blemished or unblemished, whether small or large.
Halacha 11
When a seh was purchased with money that came from the sale of produce of the Sabbatical year,25 it should not be used to redeem a donkey that is definitely a firstling.26 It may, however, be used to redeem a donkey whose firstling status is questionable.27
If [the owner of a firstling donkey] does not own a seh to redeem it, he may redeem it for its value,28 paying its worth to a priest.29 The Torah did not mention a seh to be stringent with him,30 but rather to be lenient with him, i.e., if he possessed a firstling donkey worth ten selaim, he could redeem it with aseh that is worth a dinar.31 [The rationale is that the redemption of the firstling donkey] should not be considered more stringent than [the redemption of] consecrated property which may be redeemed with its monetary value.
Halacha 12
When does the above32 apply? When the value of the firstling donkey was three zuzim33 or more. If, however, its worth was less than three zuzim, it may be redeemed only with a seh or with three zuzim.34A generous person should not give less than a sela, a parsimonious person should give half asela and an average person, three zuzim.
Halacha 13
When a person redeems a firstling donkey belonging to a colleague, the redemption is effective,35 but the donkey belongs to its owner.
Halacha 14
Priests and Levites36 are exempt from the redemption of a firstling donkey, as [Numbers 18:15] states: "The firstborn of man and the firstborn of an impure animal you shall redeem."37 All of those who are obligated to redeem a firstborn human are obligated to redeem the firstborn of an impure animal. Those who are exempt from redeeming a firstborn human38 are exempt from redeeming the firstborn of an impure animal.
Halacha 15
When a person purchases the fetus of a donkey belonging to a gentile or sells the fetus of his donkey to a gentile - although he is not allowed to do so39 - he is exempt from [redeeming] the firstborn. We do not penalize him for such an act.
If the gentile was a partner40 in the mother or the firstborn - even if he only owned a thousandth share - the animal is exempt.41 Should [the gentile own] only one limb or organ of the fetus or the mother42 - e.g., its forefoot or its hindfoot, even its ear, any limb or organ that if cut off would cause the animal to be disqualified as blemished - it is exempt from [the obligations of] a firstborn. If, however, the portion belonging to the gentile would be cut off, the animal would not be considered as blemished for the altar,43 he is obligated.44
Similarly, one who receives a donkey from a gentile to care for on the condition that they divide the offspring45 or a gentile received [a donkey] from a Jew on that condition, they are exempt from [the obligations of] the firstborn, as [indicated by Exodus 13:2]: "The first issue of the womb within the children of Israel, in humans and in animals." [Implied is that] it must entirely belong to an Israelite.
Halacha 16
When a convert converts and it is not known whether his donkey gave birth before he converted46 or afterwards,47 he is obligated to decapitate it48 or redeem it.49 If he redeems it with a seh, the seh belongs to the convert, [because we follow the principle]: When a person desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is upon him.50
Halacha 17
Halacha 18
When a cow gives birth to an offspring resembling a donkey or a donkey gives birth to an offspring resembling a horse, it is exempt. [This is derived as follows. Twice53 the Torah states:] "The first issue of a donkey you shall redeem with a seh and the first issue of a donkey...." By mentioning "the first issue of a donkey" twice, [the Torah] indicates that both the mother and the offspring must [resemble] donkeys. If such an offspring has some of the identifying marks of a donkey, there is an obligation to redeem it.54
Halacha 19
When a donkey had not given birth before and it gives birth to two males, [the owner] should give a lamb to a priest.55 If it gives birth to a male and a female [and it is not known which was born first], a lamb should be set aside to remove its holiness so that it will be permitted to benefit from it, for perhaps the male was born first.
The lamb that is set aside belongs to the owner and not to the priest. [We follow the principle]: When a person desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is upon him.56
Halacha 20
When two donkeys that have not given birth yet give birth to two males, [the owner] should give two lambs to a priest. [If they give birth to] a male and a female or two males and a female, he should give one lamb to the priest.57
Halacha 21
[If these donkeys] gave birth to two females and a male or [even] two males and two females, the priest does not receive anything.58 Moreover, [the owner] need not [even] set aside a lamb that he can keep for himself. [The rationale is that] there are many doubts involved: Maybe one gave birth to a male and the other gave birth to two females. Or perhaps one gave birth to a female and the other to a male and then a female or a female and afterwards a male. Similarly, there are many doubts when two males and two females were born.59
If there were two donkeys - one had given birth previously and one had not - and they gave birth to two males and they became intermingled, [the owner] should give one lamb to the priest.60 If they gave birth to a male and a female, he should separate a lamb for himself and he need not give it to the priest, because its status is doubtful.61 [Hence, we follow the principle]: When a person desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is upon him.
Halacha 22
Similarly, when a person purchases a donkey from a gentile and it gives birth to a male, but it is not known whether it gave birth previously or not, he should redeem it with a seh - which he may keep - because its status is doubtful.
Halacha 23
When a person possesses ten lambs - each of them having been separated because of a first issue of a donkey of a doubtful status - they are considered as ordinary property in every context.62 They should be tithed like other animals.63 One of them should be separated as the tithes and the others remain his property, as they were previously.
Halacha 24
When an Israelite possesses at home ten donkeys whose status as firstlings is definite which he inherited from his maternal grandfather who was a priest who in turn inherited them from his maternal grandfather who was an Israelite, he should separate ten se'in for them.64 They, however, [may be kept] as his own65 and, hence, he is obligated to tithe them.66
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
FOOTNOTES
1.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 81) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 22) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
2.
In contrast to the mitzvah of redeeming one's firstborn son, this obligation is incumbent on both males and females.
3.
If, however, the first issue of the donkey is female, it need not be redeemed.
4.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 82) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 23) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. The Ra'avad objects to this being considered as a separate mitzvah. InSefer HaMitzvot, loc. cit., the Rambam explains that he considers the two as separate mitzvot, because Bechorot 13a refers to them as such and draws a parallel between these mitzvot and the mitzvot ofyibbum and chalitzah which are accepted as separate mitzvot.
Bechorot 10b explains the rationale for this mitzvah, since the owner caused a priest a loss (by not redeeming the firstling donkey), the Torah decreed that he suffer financial loss. In his Moreh Nevuchim, loc. cit., the Rambam explains that this mitzvah is a safeguard to insure that the mitzvah to redeem the firstling donkeys is observed.
5.
The Hebrew term seh can refer either to a sheep or a goat, as stated in Halachah 8.
6.
I.e., its observance is not limited to Eretz Yisrael, nor to the time when the Temple is standing.
7.
I.e., the initial preference is to redeem the animal rather than behead it.
8.
The verse establishes an association between the redemption of a firstborn son and the redemption of a firstling donkey. Just as the money for the firstborn is given the priest, so to, the seh for the firstling donkey is given him (Radbaz). Nevertheless, as evident from Halachot 5-6, the association is not complete in all of its particulars.
9.
The Rambam clarifies this because from a simple reading of the verse, one might infer that all the firstborn of impure animals must be redeemed. Although all firstborn humans must be redeemed and all firstborn kosher animals must be sacrificed and/or given to a priest, among non-kosher animals, it is only among donkeys that the firstborn is designated as unique and requiring redemption. In his Moreh Nevuchim, Vol. III, ch. 39, the Rambam explains that this mitzvah is also connected with the commemoration of the exodus when God slew the Egyptian firstborn. It is associated with donkeys and not other beasts, because donkeys are a necessity in an agricultural society. Rashi (Exodus 13:13) focused on different dimensions of this concept, stating that donkeys are used as an analogy for the Egyptians, and b) the donkeys assisted the Jews in their redemption, for they carried the wealth of Egypt upon them.
10.
The Ra'avad questions the Rambam's ruling, asking: "Why can he not give the money he received for the donkey to the priest? Why is it forbidden?" After all, it is permitted to redeem the donkey for its value (Halachah 11).
The Radbaz explains that if the person would desire to pay the donkey's worth to the priest he could. Here, however, he sold the donkey and once, it was sold the money he received is forbidden. Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 321:8) quotes the Rambam's ruling. The Rama states that if the seller notifies the buyer that it is the first issue of a donkey, stipulates that the buyer will redeem it with a seh, and states that he is selling him the difference between the value of the sehand the value of the donkey, the sale is permitted
11.
I.e., the priest sets aside a seh and redeems the donkey with it. He then takes the seh as his own.
12.
For they say: "Why should I redeem it when I am entitled to keep the seh with which I redeem it?" (Sifei Cohen 321:6).
13.
As soon as the seh was set aside, the holiness of the donkey is transferred to it. Hence, when the seh dies, it is considered that the priest's property died and the owner is not under any further obligation (Rashi,Bechorot 9a).
14.
For the seh already became the priest's property [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 1:4)].
15.
Again since the redemption is already a fait accompli, the priest deserves the sehregardless of what happens to the donkey.
16.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 321:1) states that the mitzvah is "to redeem it immediately, so as not to postpone the observance of the mitzvah."
17.
In this, we see a difference between the redemption of a firstling donkey and that of a firstborn son. For the son must be redeemed after 30 days, not before (Chapter 11, Halachah 17).
18.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 1:7).
19.
This is implied by the Hebrew term eraftothat is connected to the Hebrew oref, meaning "neck." One must decapitate the animal, severing its neck (ibid.).
20.
The (Turei Zahav 321:3 notes that, as stated in Halachah 11, one may redeem the firstling donkey for its value. Hence, if one tells a priest that by giving him a calf or the like, he is redeeming the donkey for its value, the redemption is effective.
21.
See Chapter 9, Halachah 5, and notes, with regard to the definition of this term.
22.
For even if it does not appear to be a seh, it is of that species. Bechorot 12a raises this question and does not resolve it. Hence, as an initial preference, one should not use such an animal, but after the fact, it is acceptable (Radbaz, Kessef Mishneh).
The Rambam's opinion is quoted by theShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 321:3), but the Tur and the Rama differ and maintain that the status of such a redemption is questionable.
23.
This term refers to an animal that was being carried as a fetus when its mother was slaughtered and remained alive despite that slaughter (see Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot5:14). The Rambam's opinion is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 321:4), but the Tur and the Rama differ and maintain that the redemption is invalid.
24.
As stated in the previous halachah.
25.
See Hilchot Shemitah VeYoval, ch. 6, which explains the laws governing the use of money received for the sale of the produce of the Sabbatical year in detail.
26.
The sheep purchased with money from the sale of produce of the Sabbatical year is considered as the produce of the Sabbatical year itself. And the produce of the Sabbatical year should not be used for the purchase of a non-kosher animal (ibid. 6:10).
27.
As stated in Halachah 21, when redeeming a donkey whose firstling status is questionable, it is necessary to separate a sheep, but one does not have to give it to the priest. Hence, using a sheep for this process is not considered analogous to the purchase of a non-kosher animal with the produce of the Sabbatical year.
28.
See the Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 22) who concludes that when the owner does possess a seh, he must redeem the donkey with the seh rather than pay its value.
29.
See the Or Sameach and the Minchat Chinuch (loc. cit.) who question whether, after the fact, the redemption of a firstling donkey is effective if one gave less than its worth. One might argue that the priest receiving the article could say: "For me, this is worth the value of the donkey." Indeed,Hilchot Arachin 7:8 states that when one redeems consecrated property for less than its value, the redemption is valid. This position, however, is not accepted by all authorities. Compare to Chapter 11, Halachah 7.
30.
And require that a sheep be given, regardless of the difficulty involved.
31.
A dinar is equivalent to one fourth of a sela.
32.
That a firstling donkey should be redeemed for its value or for a seh.
33.
A zuz is equivalent to a dinar.
34.
The Rambam's ruling is based on his interpretation of Bechorot 11a. Rashi and the Ra'avad offer a different interpretation of that passage. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro questions the Rambam's ruling, stating that the Ra'avad's interpretation appears closer to the version of the Talmud we possess. Nevertheless, in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 321:5), Rav Yosef Caro quotes the Rambam's view.
35.
Note the Minchat Chinuch (loc. cit.) who questions whether the mitzvah is incumbent on the owner of the donkey and the person is thus acting as the owner's agent or whether the mitzvah to redeem it is incumbent on the Jewish people as a whole and any person has the right to observe. There would be a practical difference between these two views if the owner protested against the other person redeeming his firstling donkey.
36.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 321:19) states that this also applies to women of the priestly and Levitical families. Nevertheless, this applies only to the donkeys that they personally own. Those owned by their husbands are liable.
37.
I.e., the initial preference is to redeem the animal rather than behead it.
38.
And the priests and Levites are exempt from the redemption of their firstborn, as stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 9.
39.
This refers to the second clause. He is forbidden to sell his firstling donkey as a fetus to a gentile, for by doing so, he exempts himself from the mitzvah of redeeming it and thus causes the priesthood a loss. There is, however, no prohibition against purchasing a firstling fetus owned by a gentile (Radbaz).
40.
In general, it is forbidden to enter into a partnership with a gentile (Hilchot Shiluchim VeShutafim 10:5). In particular, this applies in the present instance, for he is depriving the priesthood of the presents due them. Nevertheless, he is not penalized for doing so.
41.
For, as the Rambam concludes, the firstling donkey must belong entirely to a Jew.
42.
The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 321:20) state that, in this regard, the laws that apply to a firstling donkey are the same as those applying to the firstborn of a kosher animal and they are discussed in sec. 320 which deals with that subject.
There the Tur asks why is it necessary for the Rambam to speak of the limbs of an animal when he already mentioned that any small percentage of a partnership in the animal disqualifies it. The Kessef Mishnehexplains that in this clause, the Rambam is speaking about an instance where the gentile is not a partner in the entire animal. He owns only a portion of the particular limb or organ in question. Hence, it is necessary to clarify that even in such an instance, he is exempt.
43.
I.e., if such a blemish were to exist in a kosher animal. These blemishes are mentioned in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeach, ch. 2.
44.
For the portion owned by the gentile is not significant.
45.
This was a common practice in the Talmudic era. A person would give a colleague a donkey (or other animal) to raise. As payment for raising it, he is given a half share in the donkey's offspring. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Bechorot 1:1).
46.
In which case he would be exempt from redeeming its firstborn.
47.
In which case he would be obligated.
48.
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 321:18) does not mention the option of decapitation, implying that even in this instance, redemption is the preferable option.
49.
This instance is different from that involving the presents of meat given to the priests (Chapter 9, Halachah 13). The rationale is that in this instance, the owner is forbidden to benefit from the firstling donkey unless he redeems it. Hence, he must redeem it rather than risk that transgression. Moreover, as the Rambam proceeds to explain, he does not suffer any loss through this redemption.
50.
A priest who is claiming that he is entitled to the seh for the redemption would have to prove that the conversion took place before the donkey was born. The owner is allowed to keep the seh, for there is no holiness associated with it. The question is only one of monetary law and is governed by the principle stated by the Rambam.
51.
We inform him, lest he think that the Jews are lax in the observance of sanctified aticles (Sifei Cohen 321:13).
52.
For the mitzvah only applies to the Jewish people.
53.
Exodus 13:13, 34:20.
54.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 315:6) is more lenient, stating that there is a doubt whether it must be redeemed.
55.
Even though he does not know which one is the firstborn, one of them obviously is. Hence, an obligation exists.
56.
A priest who is claiming that he is entitled to the seh for the redemption would have to prove that the male donkey was born first.
57.
For it is only certain that one of the males was the firstborn. The female could have been born before the second one. See Chapter 11, Halachah 22. Although there is a possibility that the second donkey gave birth to a male first, there is no probability that it did so. Hence the Rambam does not require that a lamb be separated for it. TheTur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah321:14) maintain that since there is a possibility that the second male is also a firstborn, the owner should separate a lamb to remove the possibility of any holiness being attached to the donkey, but he may keep the lamb as his own.
58.
Because there is no probability that the donkeys gave birth to a male first. In each instance, it is possible that the donkey gave birth to a female before the male.
59.
The Ra'avad and other commentaries question the Rambam's logic and ruling, because this is not the usual instance of asefek-sefeka. When the situation is analyzed, the only real question is: Was the male born after a female or not? Hence since there is a doubt it would seem appropriate for a lamb to be separated (and kept by the owner) to remove the possibility of the donkey being holy. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 321:14) follows the Rambam's view, while the Tur and the Rama require that a lamb be set aside. As Sifei Cohen 321:11 writes, since the owner will not suffer a loss by separating a lamb, why shouldn't he?
60.
For one of the males is definitely a firstborn.
61.
For perhaps the donkey that gave birth previously gave birth to the male.
62.
The fact that originally, there was a claim against them is not significant. Since the owner is allowed to maintain possession, as stated in the above halachot, there is no difference between these lambs and the remainder of his property.
63.
See Hilchot Bechorot, ch. 6, which describes this mitzvah. Since these lambs are ordinary property and are not consecrated, they must be tithed.
64.
For since, they originally belonged to an Israelite, there is an obligation to redeem them.
65.
His grandfather, the priest would not have to give the lambs he set aside to redeem them to another priest, because he himself is entitled to them. He bequeaths that right to his grandson, the Israelite. Hence he may keep them as his own.
66.
For they are not consecrated.
---------------------
• 3 Chapters: Issurei Biah Issurei Biah - Chapter Three, Issurei Biah Issurei Biah - Chapter Four, Issurei Biah Issurei Biah - Chapter Five • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Issurei Biah - Chapter Three
Audio: Listen | Download• Issurei Biah - Chapter Three
Halacha 1
When a person has relations with the wife of a minor, he is not liable.1[This applies] even to a yevamah with whom a nine year old [brother] had relations.2Similar [laws apply when] a person has relations with the wife of a deaf-mute,3the wife of a mentally or emotionally unstable individual,4the wife of atumtum or an androgynus,5a female deaf-mute or a woman who is mentally or emotionally unstable married to a mentally capable individual,6 or a woman whose consecration is of doubtful status or whose divorce is of doubtful status. In all of the above situations, one is not liable. If they willfully transgress, they are given stripes for rebellious conduct.
Halacha 2
Halacha 3
When the daughter of a priest commits adultery while married, she is executed by burning, as [Leviticus 21:9] states: "When the daughter of a man who is a priest will begin to commit adultery, [she will be burnt by fire]." [This applies] whether she is married to a priest or an Israelite. [Indeed,] even if her husband was a mamzer13 or a nitin14 or another whom it is forbidden to marry because of a negative commandment,15 [she is given this punishment].
The man who engages in adultery with her is executed by strangulation.16Similarly, the daughter of an Israelite who is married to a priest is [executed] by strangulation [if she commits adultery] as is the law with regard to any other married woman.
Halacha 4
When a man has relations with a consecrated maiden, they are both executed by stoning. They are not liable to be stoned to death until the maiden17 is a virgin, consecrated,18 and in her father's home. If she came of age19 or she entered the chupah20 even if the marriage was not consummated, they are executed by strangulation. [The lesser punishment is given] even if the father gave her to the emissaries of the husband21 and she committed adultery on the way.
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
When ten men enter into relations with her one after the other while she is a virgin in her father's home, the first is executed by stoning and the remainder, by strangulation.25
When does the above apply? When they had vaginal intercourse. If, however, they had anal intercourse, she is still a virgin and they are all executed by stoning.26
Halacha 7
Halacha 8
There is a new law that applies to a person who spreads a malicious report [about his wife].29 What is this new [law]? That if the gossip is discovered to be true and witnesses come [and testify] that she committed adultery when she was a consecrated maiden, even if she committed adultery after she left her father's house and even if she committed adultery after she entered the marriage canopy before she had relations with her husband, she is stoned to death at the entrance to her father's house. Other consecrated maidens concerning whom a malicious report was not spread are executed by strangulation if they committed adultery after they left their father's home, as we explained.30
Halacha 9
Where is a consecrated maiden who committed adultery stoned to death? If she committed adultery while in her father's house, even though the witnesses did not testify until she went to her father-in-law's house and married, she is stoned to death at the entrance to her father's house.34 If she committed adultery in her father-in-law's house before her father conveyed her [to her husband], she is stoned to death at the entrance to the gate of the city.35 [This applies] even if [the witnesses] testified concerning her after she returned to her father's house.
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
If [a woman] was conceived before her mother converted and born after her mother converted, she is stoned at the entrance to the gate of the city.
[The following rule applies to] every woman who is obligated to be stoned at the entrance to the gate of the city. If the city is predominantly populated by gentiles, we stone her at the entrance to the court.39
[The following rule applies to] every woman who is obligated to be stoned at the entrance to her father's house, if she does not have a father or she has a father, but he does not have a house, she is stoned at the place for stoning. The "entrance to her father's house" was mentioned only as a mitzvah.40
Halacha 12
When a person engages in relations many times with one of the arayot, he is liable for kerait or execution by the court for every time he engages in relations.41 Although the court can only execute the person only once, the different times he engages in relations are considered as different transgressions.
Similarly, if a person is liable for several different transgressions for engaging in relations once,42 if he transgressed inadvertently, he must bring a sacrifice for every transgression he performed even though he engaged in relations only once, as will be explained in Hilchot Shegagot43 If he transgressed intentionally, it is considered as if he violated many transgressions. Similarly, there is a situation where a person engages in relations once and incurs liability for lashes many times as will be explained.44
Halacha 13
The term shifchah charufah employed by the Torah refers to [a woman] who is half a Canaanite maidservant and half a freed woman45 who has been consecrated by a Hebrew servant.46 [Concerning the infidelity of such a woman, Leviticus 19:20] states: "They shall not die, because she was not freed."47 If she was freed entirely, one is liable for execution by the court, for she becomes a married woman in a complete sense, as explained in Hilchot Ishut.48
Halacha 14
[The laws regarding] relations with this maidservant are different than [those regarding] all other forbidden relations in the Torah. For she is lashed, as [ibid.] states: "There shall be an inquiry."49 He is liable to bring a guilt offering, as [ibid.:21] states: "And he shall bring his guilt offering."50Whether he transgresses intentionally or inadvertently with a shifchah charufah, he must bring a guilt offering.
When he enters into relations with her many times, whether intentionally or unintentionally, he is required to bring only one sacrifice.51 She, however, is liable for lashes for every act of relations if she acted intentionally, as is the law with regard to other instances [where relations are forbidden] by merely a negative commandment.
Halacha 15
When a person just inserts his corona into the female organ of the shifchah charufah, but does not insert the entire organ, he is not liable. [Liability is incurred only when] he inserts the entire organ.52
He is only liable when she is above majority, had engaged in relations previously and acts intentionally and willfully.53 If, however, she is a minor, she had never engaged in relations, or she transgressed inadvertently, was raped, or was sleeping, he is not liable. Similarly, if he had anal intercourse with her, he is not liable, for with regard to a shifchah charufah an equation was not established between vaginal intercourse and anal intercourse, for [Leviticus 19:20] speaks of: "ly[ing] while emitting seed."54 With regard to other [forbidden] relations, the Torah did not distinguish between one type of relations and the other, for [ibid. 18:22] speaks of "the ways [in which a man] lies with a woman." Implied is that the Torah recognizes two ways of lying with a woman.
Halacha 16
Halacha 17
When a youth nine years old engages in relations with a shifchah charufah, she is given lashes and he is required to bring a sacrifice,57 provided that she is an adult, not a virgin, and acts willfully, as we explained.58For a man is not liable to bring a sacrifice until she is liable for lashes, as [implied by] the verse: "There shall be an inquiry.... And he shall bring his guilt offering."
FOOTNOTES
1.
For there is no concept of marriage with regard to a male below the age of majority.
The term liable in this context means "liable for execution" if the transgression was performed willfully or "liable for a sacrifice" if it was performed inadvertently.
2.
A yevamah is a childless widow whom one of the brothers of the deceased is obligated to marry. Now, relations with a yevamah do not require the conscious intent of the brother who seeks to marry her (Hilchot Yibbum 2:3) and relations carried out by a nine year old are of consequence in certain contexts (Chapter 1, Halachah 14). Hence, one might think that by carrying out relations with the yevamah, the nine year old would acquire her as his wife. See also Hilchot Yibbum 5:18.
3.
A deaf-mute is not considered of sufficient mental capacity to be responsible for his actions. Hence, as the Rambam states inHilchot Ishut 4:9, he cannot consecrate a woman according to Scriptural Law. Although according to Rabbinic Law, his consecration is binding, he is not held liable for execution or a sacrifice for violating a Rabbinic prohibition.
4.
In this instance, the consecration is not binding even according to Rabbinic Law (ibid.).
5.
As mentioned in the notes to Chapter 1, Halachah 15, there is an unresolved doubt with regard to the halachic status of anandrogynus and a doubt with regard to the physiological makeup of a tumtum. Hence we cannot be certain whether the adulterer is engaging in relations with a woman whose marriage is halachicly significant.
6.
Since such women are not considered as capable of making responsible decisions, the man's consecration is not effective according to Scriptural Law. And since the consecration is not effective according to Scriptural Law, there are no punishments that result from it. In particular, however, there is a difference between the two situations, for the consecration of a woman who is mentally or emotionally unstable is not effective at all. The consecration of a female deaf-mute, by contrast, is effective according to Rabbinic Law (Hilchot Ishut, loc. cit.).
7.
He is given the punishment due any adulterer, for the consecration is binding according to Scriptural Law (Hilchot Ishut3:11). This is speaking about a situation where the couple later married. Otherwise, the adulterer would be stoned to death. Also, it is speaking about a situation where the child is over three years old. Otherwise, the relations are not significant.
8.
Neither punishment, nor a sacrifice. For she is a minor and is not responsible for her conduct.
9.
As the Rambam states in Hilchot Gerushin11:14, a woman who engages in adulterous relations becomes forbidden to her husband.
10.
Chapter 2, Halachah 4. The Ra'avad both here and in Hilchot Sotah differs with the Rambam, basing his objections on Yevamot33b which states "The seduction of a minor is always considered equivalent to rape." Since she is not responsible for her actions, her consent is of no significance. And if a woman is raped, she is permitted to her husband if he is not a priest (Hilchot Ishut24:19).
The Maggid Mishneh admits that the question raised by the Ra'avad is substantial, but points to a passage inKetubot 9a which appears to support the Rambam's decision. The Shulchan Aruch(Even HaEzer 178:3) cites both views without stating which to favor. The Beit Shmuel 178:3 states that the Ra'avad's view is accepted by most authorities.
11.
Mi'un refers to a means of terminating a Rabbinically originated marriage arrangement. When a girl's father is not alive, our Sages gave her mother and/or her brothers the opportunity to consecrate her. This consecration is not binding according to Scriptural Law (see Hilchot Ishut 4:8, Hilchot Gerushin 11:1). Hence, an adulterer is not punished for relations with her.
This law also applies to a deaf-mute and anyone else whose consecration is acceptable only according to Rabbinic Law (Rav David Arameah).
12.
A priest is not allowed to remain married to a woman who engaged in forbidden relations, even if she was compelled to do so. Nevertheless, in this instance, she can end her marriage whenever she desires without a formal divorce, it is as if she was never married. Hence, her "adultery" is not of consequence.
13.
A person born from an incestuous or adulterous relationship whom it is forbidden to marry.
14.
See Chapter 12, Halachot 22-23, which explain that this term refers to a person descended from one of the seven Canaanite nations who converted. Such a person is forbidden to marry into the Jewish people.
15.
When the prohibition against marriage is punishable by execution or kerait, the marriage is not considered valid and there is no punishment for adultery. If, however, it is forbidden only by a negative prohibition, the marriage is binding.
16.
For the Torah states the severe punishment only for the woman herself.
17.
The term maiden has a specific halachic definition: a girl who at the age of 12 (or over) manifested signs of physical maturity. She remains in this category for six months (Hilchot Ishut 2:1).
18.
But not married.
19.
I.e., the six months mentioned above passed.
20.
I.e., completed the marriage ceremony.
21.
For from this time, she is no longer under her father's control.
22.
Although the verse speaks about "a consecrated maiden," relations with even a younger girl are given the same punishment.
23.
Since she is a minor, she is not responsible for her actions and is not subjected to any punishment.
24.
I.e., she is given the more severe punishment.
25.
Because after relations with the first, she is no longer a virgin. Hence, they are given the ordinary penalty for adultery.
26.
For with regard to punishment, there is no difference between anal intercourse and vaginal intercourse.
27.
In which instance, even if she had engaged in relations beforehand, her signs of virginity would return.
28.
Ketubot 44a states that this concept is derived from a Scriptural reference. When speaking of this transgression,Deuteronomy 22:21 states: "He committed an abuse in Israel," i.e., involving a native-born Jewess. In his Commentary to the Mishneh (Ketubot 4:3), the Rambam offers a different explanation, one which has raised questions among the commentaries.
29.
See Deuteronomy 22:13-21 and Hilchot Na'arah, ch. 3, where this instance is discussed. A man enters into relations with his newly-wed wife and afterwards, claims she is not a virgin. Moreover, he produces witnesses who testify that the women committed adultery before entering into relations with him. If the testimony of the witnesses is not disproved, the women is executed as the Rambam continues to explain.
30.
Halachah 4. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, explaining that once a woman enters the marriage canopy as a virgin, she is executed by strangulation as are all other married women. The difference of opinion centers on the interpretation ofKetubot 45a. Rashi and Tosafot also differ in their interpretation of that passage.
31.
An ordinary case of adultery.
32.
The daughter of a priest who committed adultery.
33.
A consecrated maiden who committed adultery in her father's house or a maiden about whom a malicious report was spread and it was discovered to be true.
34.
As Ketubot 45a states, this is intended to dishonor her parents, as if to say: "See the offspring which you raised."
35.
As stated in Deuteronomy 22:23. This is a mark of dishonor for the city, a sign that the environment is not moral. The Rambam's ruling is based on his version of Ketubot45a. Rashi (and the standard published text of that passage) follow a different version.
Or Sameach states that since the transgression did not take place in her father's home, it is not fitting that he be dishonored in this fashion.
36.
I.e., six months after she manifests signs of physical maturity.
37.
As Hilchot Sanhedrin 13:1, 15:1, the place for stoning was a two storey building somewhat removed from the city.
38.
Since she has already come of age, the laws governing her change and she is not stoned at her father's house. If she would commit adultery at this age, she would be executed by strangulation. Hence, when she is punished for the adultery she committed beforehand, her sentence is commuted somewhat and she is not executed at her parents' home (Maggid Mishneh).
The Ra'avad and the Maggid Mishnehhimself note that when a man spreads a malicious report about a woman and his statements are proved to be correct, the woman is executed at her father's home. Although she already had relations with her husband, she is executed in the same place as before. This would indicate that her coming of age is also not significant. Rav Akiva Eiger explains that since when a malicious report was proven true, a woman is stoned to death even though she has already married her husband, it obviously is a different type of instance than an ordinary case of a maiden committing adultery.
39.
For the verse mentions stoning her "at the entrance to your gates." If the city is predominantly populated by gentiles, its entrance is not "your gates" (Tosafot, Sanhedrin 45b).
40.
I.e., the optimum manner for the execution to be performed.
41.
With regard to his obligation to bring a sin-offering for inadvertent transgression, seeHilchot Shegagot 5:1 which states that even though a person transgressed several times, as long as he does not become aware of his transgression, he is liable for only one sin offering. If he transgresses inadvertently again after he became aware of his first transgression(s), he must bring another sin-offering.
42.
E.g., he had relations with his brother's wife while she is in the niddah state, in which instance he is liable for relations with a married woman, relations with his brother's wife, and relations with a woman in theniddah state.
43.
Chapter 4, Halachah 2.
44.
Chapter 17, Halachot 9-10.
45.
Such a situation is possible when a Canaanite maidservant was owned by two partners. One released her from bondage and one did not. In this situation, she is obligated to serve her master one day and on the following day, she is free to do as she chooses.
46.
In contrast to other Jewish men, a Hebrew servant is permitted to engage in relations with a Canaanite maid-servant. Hence, the fact that this woman is half a maid-servant will not represent a difficulty for him. And because, she is half a freed woman, he may consecrate her.
47.
And since she was not freed, the Hebrew servant's consecration of her is contingent on her freedom. Until she is freed, they are not fully married.
48.
Chapter 4, Halachah 16.
49.
Keritot 11a interprets this phrase as indicating that she - and not the man - should be given the above punishment.
50.
See Hilchot Shegagot, ch. 9, which describes the particulars of this sacrifice.
51.
Keritot 9a derives this concept through the principles of Biblical exegesis. If, however, he enters into relations with many different maid-servants, he is liable for each act (Ra'avad; Hilchot Shegagot 9:5).
52.
The term literally means "complete relations." Our translation is based on the definition given by the Rambam in Chapter 1, Halachah 10. It must be noted that Tosafot, Yevamot 55b understands Rashi as interpreting the phrase "conclude relations" to mean "to ejaculate." Support for that interpretation is brought from the fact that the prooftext from Leviticus speaks of "lying with her with seed." Somehave also pointed to the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Keritot 2:5 for support for this interpretation.
53.
For Keritot 11a teaches: Whenever the woman is lashed, he is required to bring a sacrifice. Whenever she is not punished, he is not liable. And she is not punished unless she is an adult who acts willfully.
54.
And that is significant only with regard to vaginal intercourse.
55.
This is the version of the standard printed text of the Mishneh Torah. Many authentic manuscripts and early printings state "they," i.e., both the male and the female.
56.
For they committed an immoral act which requires punishment lest they continue the pattern.
57.
Since he is already nine years old, his sexual acts are of consequence. Hence, since she transgressed willfully, she is liable. And since she is liable, he is liable for a sacrifice. For a sacrifice is not punishment, but atonement. Although he is still a minor, atonement is still required. In Hilchot Shegagot 9:3, the Rambam clarifies: "It appears to me that he does not bring [the sacrifice] until he comes of age."
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, maintaining that a minor is never required to bring such a sacrifice, for this sacrifice is a punishment. And since the male is not liable, the female is also not liable.
58.
In Halachah 15.
Issurei Biah - Chapter Four
Halacha 1
[A woman in] the niddah1 state is like all of the other arayot. A person who inserts his corona into her vaginal or anal orifice is liable for kerait. [This applies] even if she is a minor who is three years old, as applies with regard to other arayot.
For a woman can become impure as a niddah even on the day she is born.2And a girl who is ten days becomes impure because of zivah.3 This concept was communicated through the Oral Tradition. There is no difference between an adult and an a minor with regard to the impurity associated with nidah andzivah.
Halacha 2
[The prohibitions that apply] to one who has relations with a nidah apply throughout the seven days, even if blood was sighted only on the first day. [These same prohibitions] apply to one who has relations with a woman who gave birth to a male throughout the seven days [following birth], to one who has relations with a woman who gave birth to a female throughout the fourteen days [following birth], to one who has relations with a zavah through the time she bleeds and then counts [seven "clean" days].4 This applies also to a Canaanite maidservant and one who has been freed. All [of these relations] are punishable by kerait.
[The association is derived as follows:] With regard to a nidah, [Leviticus 15:19] states: "She will be in her niddah state for seven days." With regard to a zavah, [ibid.:25] states: "All the days of the flow of her impurity will be like the days of her niddah state."5 With regard to a woman who gave birth to a male,6 [ibid. 12:2] states: "She will become impure as in the days of her nidahaffliction." 7 And with regard to a woman who gave birth to a female, [ibid. 12:5] states: "She will be impure as in her niddah state for two weeks."8
Halacha 3
When does the above - that the impurity is dependent on [the passage of] days - apply? When the woman immersed herself in the waters of a mikveh9after these specifically mentioned days.10 If, however, a niddah, a zavah or a woman who gave birth did not immerse in a mikveh, a person is liable forkerait for having relations with one of them even several years afterwards. For the Torah made the matter dependent on [the passage of] days and immersion, as [Leviticus 15:18] states: "And they shall immerse themselves [in the water]...." This teaches a general principle with regard to any impure person: he is in a state of impurity until he [or she] immerses.
Halacha 4
The prohibitions against relations with a niddah, a zavah, and a woman after childbirth do not apply with regard to relations with gentile women.11 Our Sages decreed that all gentiles, male and female, would be considered likezavim at all times, whether or not they experienced such discharges,12 with regard to matters of purity and impurity.
Halacha 5
All blood manifest by a woman after childbirth during the 33 days associated with the birth of a male13 and the 66 days associated with the birth of a female14 is called blood of purity.15 It does not prevent a woman from [relations with] her husband. Instead, she immerses herself after seven days [of impurity] for a male and fourteen for a female. She may then engage in relations with her husband16 even though her blood flows.17
Halacha 6
All of those who must immerse themselves are required to immerse themselves during the day with the exception of a niddah and a woman after childbirth.18 For with regard to a niddah, [Leviticus 15:19] states: "She will be in her niddah state for seven days." Her niddah state prevails for all of the seven days.19 She immerses on the evening of the eighth day. Similarly, a woman who gives birth to a male child immerses on the evening of the eighth day, and one who gives birth to a female immerses on the evening of the fifteenth day, for a woman who gives birth is comparable to one in the niddahstate, as we explained.20
Halacha 7
If she21 delayed the matter for many days and did not immerse herself, when she immerses herself, she should immerse only at night. For if she immerses during the day, an error [may be] made and another niddah may come and immerse herself on the seventh day.
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
Whenever a woman has a veset,24 her husband can assume that she is [ritually pure and] permitted until she tells him "I am impure" or she is established as a niddah in her neighborhood.25
If a woman's husband went overseas and left her ritually pure, when he comes he does not have to ask her [concerning her state]. Even if he finds her asleep, he may enter into relations with her26 as long as it is not the time when she is expected to menstruate.27 He need not suspect that perhaps she is a niddah. If he left her a niddah, she is forbidden to him until she tells him: "I am ritually pure."28
Halacha 10
When a woman tells her husband: "I am ritually impure," and afterwards she tells him: "I am ritually pure. Before I was just speaking facetiously with you," her word is not accepted.29 If she provides a rationale for her original statements, her word is accepted. 30
What is implied? Her husband asked her to engage in relations and his sister or his mother was together with her in the courtyard. She originally said she was impure. Afterwards, she said: "I am pure. I told you that I am impure only because of your sister or your mother; lest they see us." [In this instance,] her statement is accepted. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.31
Halacha 11
When a man was in the midst of relations with a woman who had been ritually pure and she said: "I became impure," he should not separate himself immediately while he is erect. For withdrawing is as pleasurable for him as entry. If he withdraws while he is still erect, he is liable for kerait,32 like one who enters into relations with a niddah. This law also applies with regard to other arayot.33
What should he do? Implant his toenails in the ground and wait without moving until he loses his erection.34 Afterwards, he should withdraw.
Halacha 12
It is forbidden for a person to engage in relations35 with his wife near the time she can expect menstruation to begin,36 lest she menstruate in the midst of relations. [This is alluded to by Leviticus 15:31]: "And you shall warn the children of Israel concerning their impurity."37
For how long [is it necessary to refrain from relations]? If [the woman] would ordinarily begin menstruating during the day, she is forbidden to enter into relations from the beginning of the day. If she would ordinarily begin menstruating during the night, she is forbidden to enter into relations from the beginning of the night.38
Halacha 13
If the time when menstruation could be expected to come passes and she did not begin menstruating, she is permitted to engage in relations after the time when menstruation was expected to begin passes.
What is implied? If she was accustomed to begin menstruating after six hours of the day passed. She is forbidden to engage in relations from the beginning of the day. If six hours pass without her beginning to menstruate, she is forbidden to engage in relations until the evening. 39 Similarly, if she was accustomed to begin menstruating after six hours of the night and that time passed without her beginning to menstruate, she is forbidden to engage in relations until sunrise.
Halacha 14
It is the habit of Jewish men and women to carry out a personal inspection after relations.40 What is implied? The man should clean himself with a cloth prepared for [this purpose] and the woman should clean herself with a cloth prepared for [this purpose]. [The purpose of these inspections is] to see whether the woman menstruated in the midst of relations. The man may allow the woman to check with his cloth. Since her word is accepted with regard to her [cloth], it is also accepted with regard to his.
Halacha 15
Halacha 16
Modest women do not engage in relations until they carry out an inspection beforehand.44 A woman who does not have a [fixed] veset is forbidden to engage in relations until she carries out an inspection.45 Therefore, she engages in relation with two edim, one for before relations and one for afterwards. When, however, a woman has a [fixed] veset, she need not use an ed before relations except as a measure of modesty.
Halacha 17
When a man engages in intercourse several times [in one night], [he and his wife] do not have to check their two edim after each time they engage in intercourse. Instead, he should clean himself with his ed, she should clean herself with her ed after each time they have relations that entire night. In the morning, they should check the edim. If blood is discovered on her ed or on his ed, she is impure.
If a women engaged in relations, cleaned herself, and then the ed was lost, she should not engage in relations again until she makes an internal inspection with another ed first. [We fear that] perhaps there was blood on theed that was lost.50
Halacha 18
[The following rules apply if] she placed the ed51 under a pillow or a bolster and blood was discovered upon it. If [the stain] is extended, she is impure. For we can assume that [the stain] came from the cleaning.52 If it is rounded,53she is pure. [We assume that the stain] came only from the blood of a louse which was killed under the pillow.54
Halacha 19
[When a woman] cleaned herself with an ed that has been checked, then touched it to her thigh,55 and on the next day discovered blood upon it, she is impure. We do not say: Maybe a louse was killed when she touched it to her thigh.56
[The following rules apply if] she cleaned herself with an ed that was not checked57 and she did not know whether it had blood on it before she cleaned herself with it or not. If there was more than a gris of blood [on it], she is [considered] a niddah.58 If the stain was less than that, she is pure. [We assume that the stain] came from a louse.
Halacha 20
When a woman suffers vaginal bleeding in the midst of relations,59she is permitted to engage in relations again a second time once she becomes pure.60 If she suffers vaginal bleeding [in the midst of relations] a second time, she is permitted to engage in relations a third time. If she suffers vaginal bleeding [in the midst of relations] a third time,61 she is forbidden to ever enter into relations again with this husband.62
When does the above apply? When there was no other factor that [the bleeding] could be attributed to.63 If, however, they entered into relations close to the time when she was expected to menstruate,64 we attribute [the bleeding] to her ordinary pattern. If she had a wound [in her vaginal area], we attribute [the bleeding] to the wound. If, however, the blood that comes from the wound is a different shade than the blood which she sees in the midst of relations, she may not attribute [the bleeding] to the wound.65
We accept the word of a woman when she says: "If have a wound in the uterus which bleeds."66 On this basis, she is permitted to her husband even though the uterus bleeds in the midst of relations.
Halacha 21
When a woman bled in the midst of relations on three [successive] occasions and there was no outside factor to which to attribute [the bleeding], she is required to divorce. She may, however, marry a second husband.67 If she married a second time and bled in the midst of relations on three [successive] occasions, she is required to divorce, but she may marry a third man. If, however, she married a third time and bled in the midst of relations on three [successive] occasions, she is required to divorce and she may not marry again68 until she is healed from this sickness.
Halacha 22
How does a woman check herself to see whether she has been healed from this sickness?69 She brings a lead tube with its edge doubled over inside of it.70 She inserts the tube into her vagina until the place it can reach. She then places a shaft within the tube with a cotton swab placed at its top. She pushes [the shaft] until the swab reaches the opening of the uterus and then takes out the swab. If blood is found on the top of swab, it can be assumed that the blood discovered in the midst of relations comes from the uterus.71 If there was no blood on the swab, it can be assumed that the blood discovered [in the midst of relations] comes from pressure on the sides of the vaginal channel.72 She is pure and may marry another man, as stated in Hilchot Ishut.73
FOOTNOTES
1.
As will be explained, the term niddah refers to a woman who suffers vaginal bleeding at the expected time of her monthly period.
2.
Although a woman usually does not begin menstrual bleeding until around the age of twelve. If, however, she does have menstrual bleeding before then, she is bound by the halachic consequences.
3.
For if a woman bleeds for three consecutive days after the seven days associated with her menstrual period, she is considered as azavah. The first three days this is possible is the eighth, ninth, and tenth days of her life.
Altough she can become impure from the day of her birth onward, punishment is not allotted for relations with her until she becomes three. For only at that age are relations with her significant, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 13.
4.
See Chapter 6, Halachah 8.
5.
Thus establishing an association between the two.
6.
See Chapter 10.
7.
See Chapter 6, Halachah 8.
8.
See Chapter 6, Halachah 8.
9.
A ritual bath that meets the qualifications for this purpose. If she immersed herself in an ordinary bath, by contrast, that is not acceptable as explained in Hilchot Mikveot.
10.
If a niddah immerses herself in the middle of these days, however, the immersion is of no consequence.
11.
Although relations with gentile women are forbidden, none of these particular transgressions apply according to Scriptural Law. For all the defined states of ritual purity and impurity apply only with regard to the Jewish people. The fact that a gentile woman experiences the same physical conditions is not of consequence.
12.
I.e., this was a decree imposed to prevent intimate contact with them, regardless of their physical condition. See Hilchot Mitam'ei Mishkav UMoshav 2:10.
13.
As the Torah relates (Leviticus 12:2-4), after the birth of a male child a woman becomes impure for seven days. Afterwards, she immerses herself to regain ritual purity. For the next 33 days, even if she suffers uterine bleeding, her state does not change and she remains ritually pure.
14.
As ibid.:5 states, similar concepts apply after a woman gives birth to a female except that she originally becomes impure for 14 days. Afterwards, she remains pure for 66 days.
15.
Niddah 36a relates that there is one source of bleeding - the womb - for all 40 (or 80) days. It is just that during the first 7 (14), the Torah rules that this blood is impure and during the final 33 (66), the Torah rules that the blood is pure.
16.
The Kessef Mishneh cites Chapter 7, Halachah 7, which states that the above applies only when a woman is not impure because of zavah bleeding before childbirth. If she is impure for such reasons, she must count seven "clean" days before she immerses herself and engages in relations with her husband.
Also, as will be explained (see Chapter 11, Halachot 5-6), at present the custom is not to observe the concept of blood of purity at all. Even if a woman gives birth, she must wait "seven clean days" after seeing any uterine bleeding.
17.
I.e., she suffers uterine bleeding which would otherwise render her ritually impure.
18.
At present when we do not make any distinctions between niddah and zivah, all women immerse themselves at night.
19.
She cannot terminate the last day earlier by immersing herself in the daytime.
20.
In Halachah 2.
21.
A niddah or a woman after childbirth.
22.
Although such problems are uncommon today, there are several examples - e.g., woman living in new settlements in Israel's West Bank - where these principles are relevant.
23.
She should not, however, immerse herself on the seventh day even if she refrains from engaging in relations until nightfall [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 197:4)].
24.
A fixed time when the onset of menstruation can be expected to begin, as will be explained. Since she has a fixed time when menstruation is expected, at other times, we assume that she remains ritually pure. If she does not have a fixed time when menstruation can be expected to begin, her husband must ask her concerning her state. He cannot make any assumptions (Maggid Mishneh, Kessef Mishneh).
25.
By wearing clothes designated to be worn at this time.
26.
Without inquiring about her ritual state.
27.
Even if there was ample time for her to have become impure due to menstruation, to wait the appointed time, and then to immerse herself, he may assume that she did that. Since she was pure when he left her, we may assume that all of the above transpired [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 184:11)].
28.
Since he knows that she was ritually impure, he cannot assume that she changed her status. Instead, she must explicitly inform him of that change [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 185:1)].
29.
And he must consider her as if she is actually ritually impure.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 185:3) states that if she corrects her statements immediately, her word is accepted.
30.
The Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 185:4) state that if she performed an act that indicated that she was impure, e.g., she wore the clothes that she wears in the niddah state, providing a valid explanation is not sufficient to clear the suspicions and she is considered impure.
31.
E.g., "I originally made a mistake. I thought I was impure according to law and discovered that in fact I was pure," "I did not have strength to engage in relations and avoided them by giving this excuse" (Hagahot Maimoniot).
32.
The Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 185:5) states that if a person withdraws while erect because he is unfamiliar with the transgression involved, he should fast for 40 days to seek atonement. These fasts need not be consecutive. He should also give generously to charity.
33.
I.e., if a person realized his transgression while involved in relations with other arayot, he should not withdraw while erect.
34.
The Rama (loc. cit.) adds that he should be overcome with awe concerning the transgression which he faces.
35.
The Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 184:2) state that it is only necessary to refrain from relations, other expressions of closeness are permitted. Even hugging and kissing are permitted (Siftei Cohen 184:6). This, however, represents the mere letter of the law. There are many authorities who are more stringent and forbid these expressions of closeness (ibid., Turei Zahav 184:3). In some communities, the custom is to observe all stringencies as if the woman was actually a niddah.
36.
See ch. 8, which elaborates on this subject, speaking about situation when women have a fixed veset or a veset that has not been firmly established.
37.
The entire concept of vesetot, calculating the expected time when a woman will begin menstruating is a Rabbinic injunction. Hence the citation of a Scriptural verse is merely anasmachta, a support, and not a direct Scriptural command (Maggid Mishneh).
38.
The Siftei Cohen 184:7 states that this applies only when a woman is accustomed to begin menstruating at a given time during the day or night. If, however, she does not have a fixed time when she begins menstruating, relations are also forbidden during the preceding day or night. This stringency is not, however, accepted by all authorities.
39.
During the evening, however, she is permitted. Before entering into relations, the woman should carry out an internal examination to verify that she in fact did not begin menstruation [Tur, Rama (Yoreh De'ah 184:9)].
40.
This ruling is mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 186:1) as a minority perspective. The prevailing view is that when a woman possesses a fixed veset, she and her husband need not carry out such inspections at all. If she does not possess a fixed veset, she and her husband should carry out these inspections before and after the first three times they engage in relations. If no blood is discovered, it is established that sexual relations does not cause the woman to menstruate. Hence, in the future, the couple can engage in relations without making these inspections.
41.
Since they are worn-out, they are soft and pliable. It is possible for the woman to insert them into all the corners of the vagina.
42.
In this way, any speck of blood will be noticeable. Needless to say, they must also be clean. Today, in many Jewish communities, special clothes are prepared for this purpose - and other inspections which a woman must undergo - and are available from the local mikveh and at times, even in pharmacies.
43.
Cotton may also be used [Kessef Mishneh;Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 196:6)].
44.
As the Rambam continues to explain, this applies even if she has a fixed veset.
45.
The Ra'avad and Rav Moshe Cohen object to the Rambam's ruling, explaining that the Rambam's source, Niddah 11b, applies only with regard to the laws of ritual purity and not with regard to relations with one's husband. Indeed, the Rambam himself appears to have equivocated back and forth concerning the issue. In the first draft (which is the standard printed text) of his Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 1:7), he follows the position advanced by the Ra'avad. It is only in the Mishneh Torah and the final text of the Commentary to the Mishneh (see Rav Kappach's translation) that he changes his mind.
Although the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah186:2) quotes the Rambam's ruling here as a minority view, the prevailing opinion is that such an inspection is unnecessary. Moreover, a woman should not carry out such an inspection in the presence of her husband, lest he think that she became impure.
46.
All these four types of women are unlikely to menstruate. Nevertheless, they must take the precaution suggested by the Rambam.
47.
Who will suffer hymeneal bleeding after the first (or more) occasions of intercourse. See Chapter 5, Halachah 19.
48.
I.e., a woman after childbirth, as described in Halachah 5.
49.
Thus checking to see whether or not she is bleeding will serve no purpose. This bleeding does not, however, render her ritually impure or forbidden to her husband according to Scriptural Law.
50.
If, however, the ed is clean, we assume that the ed she used at night had also been clean.
51.
This is speaking about an ed that was known to be clean beforehand (Maggid Mishneh).
52.
Since the stain is extended, we assume that the woman had touched a source of bleeding. As she moved the ed, the stain became extended.
53.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 190:34) states that this applies only when the stain is smaller than a gris (see Chapter 9, Halachah 6). If it is larger than that measure, we do not assume that it comes from a louse, because it is unlikely that a louse will produce that much blood.
54.
This applies even if there is no trace of the body of the louse. We assume that when she put the ed under the pillow, she killed the louse and that produced a rounded stain. If she placed the ed in a box or in any place where a louse is unlikely to be found, she is considered as impure even if the stain is round (Maggid Mishneh).
55.
And afterwards, placed it in a safe place.
56.
For the likelihood of her suffering vaginal bleeding is greater than that of her killing a louse when touching the eid to her thigh. TheMaggid Mishneh interprets the Rambam's ruling as applying even if the stain is round. He notes that other authorities differ and apply the principles stated in the previous law. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah190:35) quotes both opinions without stating which to follow.
57.
This refers to an ed which we do not know whether it was dirty or not. If, however, we know that the ed was dirty, she is not considered impure even if a large stain is found [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 190:36)].
58.
When a stain is larger than a gris, we assume that it will not have come from a louse.
59.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 187:1) emphasizes that these laws apply only when the bleeding is noticed directly after intercourse. If there is an interval before she discovers the bleeding, these laws do not apply.
60.
For an occurrence that takes place once or twice is not usually considered to establish a recurrent pattern.
61.
I.e., on three consecutive occasions without there being an occasion where relations did not lead to vaginal bleeding in the interim (Siftei Cohen 187:3).
62.
Instead, she must be divorced. She may, however, remarry as stated in the following halachah.
The reason she is required to divorce is that the recurrence of a factor three times establishes a chazzakah, a presumption that this factor will continue to recur in the future. Thus if she began bleeding on three successive occasions in the midst of relations with her husband, we assume that she will continue to do so in the future. Since she suffered vaginal bleeding in the midst of intercourse, those relations are considered as involving a severe transgression. On the first three occasions, she and her husband are not held responsible for this is obviously a deviation from the norm. If, however, a pattern is established, this is considered the norm and if she would bleed in the midst of relations in the future, the transgression would be considered as willful. To prevent that from happening, we require divorce.
It must be emphasized that all this applies after the woman has ceased hymeneal bleeding. It is, however, possible for her to engage in relations several times at the beginning of her marriage and continue hymeneal bleeding. See the conclusion of Chapter 5.
63.
And thus, it is assumed that the relations are the cause of the vaginal bleeding.
64.
Note the Siftei Cohen 187:16 who offers several resolutions how this is possible despite the prohibition mentioned in Halachah 12.
65.
Unless we know that the shades of blood are different, we assume that they are the same and attribute the bleeding to the wound (Maggid Mishneh; Siftei Cohen 187:19).
66.
Note the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 187:5) who emphasizes the importance of adding the words "which bleeds."
67.
For we accept the possibility that the difficulty was particular to her first husband and would not affect her relations with other men.
68.
Since the same condition recurred with three different men, a chazzakah is established and we assume that it will recur with all men.
69.
She may check herself in this manner at any time in the process, even before being divorced by her first husband [Maggid Mishneh; see Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah187:3)].
70.
So that it will be smooth and will not scratch her.
71.
For the swab was touched to the uterus without contact with any other part of the body.
72.
And such bleeding does not render her impure.
Without minimizing the effectiveness of this method of checking devised by the Rabbis of the Talmud, today there are more effective medical tools available and it is possible to ascertain the source of a woman's bleeding in that manner. A careful inspection by a doctor or nurse under the guidance of a Rav may - and should - be employed as soon as such problems occur.
73.
Hilchot Ishut 25:8. The Rambam is implying that she cannot remarry her third husband. In Hilchot Ishut, he explains that when a man divorces a woman for this reason, the husband must know he may never remarry her, for otherwise it would be as if he gave the divorce conditionally. If she becomes healed, it would not be effective.
Issurei Biah - Chapter Five
Halacha 1
A woman becomes impure due to factors beyond her control, whether forniddah or for zivah.1
What is implied? For example, she jumped from place to place;2 she saw animals, beasts, or fowl copulating, was aroused, and began bleeding.3 In these and in other analogous instances, regardless of the situation, since she experienced bleeding, she becomes impure.
She becomes impure from even the smallest amount of bleeding. Even a drop of blood the size of a mustard seed [makes her impure as if] much blood had drained from her.
Halacha 2
All women become impure [when blood is discovered in] the outer chamber [of the vagina]. Even though the blood did not emerge outside [her body], but instead, was discharged from the womb without flowing further, since it emerged from the upper portion of the vaginal channel,4 she is impure, even though the blood is still within her flesh. [This is alluded to by Leviticus 15:19:] "A discharge of blood within her flesh."
Until where does the upper portion of the vaginal channel extend? Until the place that the male organ reaches when inserted entirely during relations. The upper portion of the vaginal channel itself is like the uterus.5
Halacha 3
Our Sages6 spoke in metaphoric terms with regard to a woman. The uterus where a fetus is formed is called "the source." It is the place where the blood that renders a woman a niddah or a zavah emanates from. It is called "the room," for it is found deep within her body. The entire uterine channel,7 i.e., the lengthy place whose entrance contracts severely at the time of pregnancy so that the fetus will not fall, but opens very wide at birth is called "the antechamber," i.e., it is like a gateway to the uterus.
Halacha 4
When the male organ is inserted entirely during relations, it enters the "antechamber" but does not reach its end. Instead, it is slightly removed according to the size of the organs. Above the "room" and the "antechamber" - but located between the "room" and the "antechamber" - is the place where the woman's two ovaries and the ducts in which her ova become mature are located. This place is called "the loft." There is an opening from the "loft" to the top of the "antechamber." This opening is called the "passageway." When the male organ is inserted entirely during relations it goes beyond the "passageway."8
Halacha 5
Blood which comes from the "room" is always impure with the exception of "the blood of purity"9 which the Torah deemed pure and bleeding which occurs before birth, as will be explained.10 Blood from the "loft" is entirely pure. It is like the blood from a wound in the intestines, the liver, or a kidney and the like.
[The following laws apply when blood] is discovered in the "antechamber." If it is discovered between the "passageway" [and the uterus], she is impure, for the assumption is that it came from "the room." She is liable for entering the Temple11 and we burn terumah and sacrificial foods because of this.12 We do not say that perhaps it descended from the "loft" through the opening, for most of the blood found in such a place is from the "room."
When blood is found in the "antechamber" between the opening [and the entrance to the vagina], she is impure, because of a doubt. Perhaps [the blood] came from the "room" or [perhaps it] flowed from the loft through the passageway. Therefore we do not burn terumah and sacrificial foods because of this, nor is she liable for entering the Temple.13
Halacha 6
Not every liquid that comes from the "room" renders a woman impure, only blood, as [ibid.] states: "A discharge of blood." Therefore if a white or a green14 liquid flows from the uterus, even if it is viscous like blood, she is pure since it does not appear as blood.
Halacha 7
There are five [colors of] blood that [render] a woman impure. They are: red, black, bright saffron, muddy water, and diluted wine.15 All other colors are pure.
Halacha 8
What is meant by red? The color of blood that comes from the blood which flows initially when people let blood. This blood is placed in a cup, the stain is placed next to it, and [the two] are compared. The black is like dried ink.16
What is meant by bright saffron? Fresh saffron should be brought together with the clod of earth from which it is growing. From the better stalks, one should take the middle stalk that is entirely a stem. In each one, there are three stalks and each stalk has three leaves. One should bring the stain next to the middle leaf on the middle stalk and compare it.
What is meant by "like muddy water"? We take earth from the valley of Sichnei or the like which is red and pour water over it until the water level is the thickness of a garlic peel above the earth. There is no required amount of water or earth that must be brought. One should stir them in the container and compare [the color to that of the stain] at that time while [the water] is murky. If [the water] becomes clear, one should stir it again and make it murky.
Halacha 9
If the color of the stain matched the color of any of these four shades or was deeper than them, [the woman] is impure. If it is lighter than they are, she is pure.
What is implied? If a black stain was darker than dried ink, [the woman] is impure. If it was lighter than it, i.e., it was like a black olive, tar, or a raven, she is pure. Similar principles apply with regard to the other three colors.
Halacha 10
What is meant by like diluted wine? Like one portion of fresh, undiluted wine like the wine of the Sharon in Eretz Yisrael17 mixed with two portions of water. If the appearance of the stain was darker or lighter than this, [the woman] is pure. [The stain must be] the exact color of this mixture.
A woman's word is accepted if she says: "I had a stain of this-and-this color and I lost it." The wise man rules whether she is pure or impure [based on her statement].18
Halacha 11
How does a person bring the two close and compare? He takes the portion of the cloth that has the stain in his hand and looks at it and at the ink, the saffron leaf, the blood that was let [contained] in a cup, the muddy water, or the diluted wine [contained] in a cup. He compares them according to his perception and rules whether she is impure or pure.
He should not look at the cup from the outside. Instead, he should look at the liquid in the cup. The cup should be wide, weigh a maneh, and contain twoluggin,19 so that light will enter it and it will not be shadowy.
Halacha 12
A stain should be checked only on a white cloth and in sunlight. One makes a shadow with his hand over the stain while standing in the sun so that he will be able to see it as it is.20
It is not necessary for every person checking a stain to do all the above whenever he checks [a stain]. Instead, a sage develops a sensitive eye [to the colors of stains]. When he sees it, he will immediately rule whether it is impure or pure. If he has doubts regarding the appearance of a particular stain, he should bring it close and compare it to ink, to blood that has been let, or to the other [impure] colors.
Halacha 13
[The following rules apply when] a woman discharges a piece [of flesh from the vagina]. Even if it is red, she is impure [only] when it is accompanied by blood. If not, she is pure.21 Even if [when the piece of flesh] is cut open, it is filled with blood, she is ritually pure. For this is not the blood of niddah, but rather blood from the piece [of flesh].
Halacha 14
When the woman discharges a piece [of flesh] which is torn and there is blood collected within it, she is impure.22
[The following rules apply when a woman] discharges something like a shell, something like a hair, something like earth, or something like mosquitoes. If these entities have a red appearance, they should be placed in lukewarm water. If they dissolve, she is impure. For it was blood that congealed. And whenever [a woman] discovers dried blood, she is impure.23
If the entities remained in lukewarm water for more than a day and then dissolved, there is a doubt whether the woman is impure. If they did not dissolve after an entire day, they are from a wound and she is pure.
Halacha 15
[The following rules apply if a woman] discharges something resembling a locust, a fish, a teeming animal, or a crawling animal. If it is accompanied by blood, it is impure. If not, it is pure.24
Halacha 16
When a woman places a tube in her "antechamber" and expels blood through the tube,25 she is pure. For [Leviticus 15:19] speaks of "A discharge of blood within her flesh." [Implied is that] the discharge must be within her flesh as is the ordinary way in which women menstruate. For it is not ordinary for a woman to discharge blood through a tube.26
Halacha 17
When a woman urinated and excreted blood together with the urine, she is pure.27 [This applies] whether she was standing or sitting while urinating. Even if she has physical sensations and her body shudders,28 she need not suspect [that the blood originated in the uterus]. Instead, the sensation is associated with her urination [and] urine does not originate in the uterus. Instead, this blood [stems from] a wound in the colon or in the kidney.
Halacha 18
Hymeneal bleeding is pure. It is neither the blood of niddah or the blood ofzivah, for it is not from the uterus. Instead, it is blood from a wound.
What are the laws applying to virgins [who suffer] hymeneal bleeding?29 If she married when she was a minor, whether she never menstruated or whether she menstruated while in her father's home,30 she is permitted to her husband until the wound heals. For any bleeding that she discovers stems from the wound. If she discovers other blood after the wound heals, she is considered as a niddah.
Halacha 19
[The following rules apply when a woman] marries when she is a na'arah.31 If she never menstruated beforehand, she is permitted to her husband for four days, by day and by night, even though blood is flowing, provided the wound did not heal.32
If she had already menstruated in her father's home and then married, her husband should not [continue] to engage in relations with her.33 After the first time, he should separate. The hymeneal bleeding is considered as if it is the beginning of menstruation.
Halacha 20
Halacha 21
Similarly, with regard to a minor who is allowed to continue engaging in relations until the wound heals, even if it does not heal for an entire year, they may engage in relations either non-consecutively or day after day.
Halacha 22
[The following rules apply when a girl] married while she was a minor and became a na'arah while married to her husband. [If] the blood is still flowing because of the wound, all of the times she engaged in relations while a minor are considered as one night and she is given license to complete the four days granted to her38 during the period of na'arut.
Even if the three days she is granted during the period of na'arut are all non-consecutive, [e.g.,] they engaged in relations one night every two months, this is permitted, provided the wound has not healed.
Halacha 23
How do we know whether or not the wound has healed? If [the woman] would discover blood when she stands but not when she sits; if she would discover [blood] when she sits on the earth, but not when she sits on pillows or blankets,39the wound has not healed.40 If, however, the bleeding ceases and she does not discover [blood], whether she stands or whether she sits on a pillow, the wound has healed. Similarly, even if her bleeding has not ceased, but she continues to discover blood even when she is sitting on pillows and blankets, we assume that this is not blood from the wound, but rather menstrual bleeding.41
Halacha 24
If she would discover blood in the midst of relations, [we assume] that it comes as a result of the wound.42 If she engaged in relations and did not discover blood and afterwards, discovered blood out of the context of relations, [we assume] that it is menstrual bleeding.
Halacha 25
When a man engages in relations with a virgin and she does not bleed and then, he engages in relations with her again and she does bleed, [we assume] that this is menstrual bleeding, even if she is a minor. [The rationale is that] if it were hymeneal bleeding, it would have appeared the first time.
When a man has relations with a girl below the age of three and she bleeds, this is hymeneal bleeding.
FOOTNOTES
1.
I.e., not only does a woman become impure when she suffers ordinary menstrual bleeding, she becomes impure when that bleeding appears to be brought on by an external cause.
2.
And we assume the unusual exertion brought on the uterine bleeding.
3.
Our Sages appreciated that sexual desire could produce uterine bleeding.
4.
We have given a biological term for the metaphoric term used by our Sages which literally means "between the teeth." For a woman to become impure, the blood must emerge from the upper portion of the vaginal channel and reach the lower portion, as explained in Halachah 5.
5.
And blood there does not render a woman ritually impure.
6.
Niddah 17b.
7.
The term used by our Sages literally means "the neck of the uterus."
8.
See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 2:4) where he describes these terms in greater detail, drawing on his medical knowledge.
9.
Blood which flows after childbirth as mentioned in Chapter 4, Halachah 5.
10.
Chapter 7, Halachah 2.
11.
For it is forbidden to enter the Temple while ritually impure.
12.
When terumah or sacrificial food becomes ritually impure, it is no longer fit for consumption and must be burned. If, however, it did not become impure, it is forbidden to burn it. The fact that we burn these objects after such a woman touches them indicates that she has become impure according to Scriptural Law.
13.
She is, however, forbidden to enter the Temple and forbidden to touch terumah or sacrificial foods. Similarly, she is forbidden to engage in relations with her husband. This is particularly true in the present age. We rule stringently and forbid a woman to her husband no matter where the blood is discovered [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah 2:7)].
14.
In halachic terminology, the Hebrew termyarok can also mean yellow or golden. SeeShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 188:1) which discusses this issue.
15.
Implied is that if the stain does not match any of these colors, even if it has a red tint, it does not render the woman impure. This, however, applied in Talmudic times when the Rabbis were able to carefully distinguish between different shades of red. At present, however, if a stain has a red tint, it should be considered impure. We do not attempt to make these fine distinctions (Rambam, Commentary to the Mishnah, Niddah 2:7;Siftei Cohen 188:1).
16.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Niddah2:6), the Rambam explains that certain factors will turn red blood to black.
17.
A region not far from the Mediterranean Coast, slightly northeast of present day Tel Aviv.
18.
As mentioned above, in the present age, we rule stringently with regard to all shades of red. Nevertheless, this law applies with regard to secretions of other colors even in the present age. A sage can make a ruling based on a woman's description. If, however, a secretion appears to be blood, but a woman protests that a sage ruled that such a secretion did not render her impure, her word is not accepted [Maggid Mishneh;Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 188:2)].
19.
The commentaries to Niddah 21a interpret this as meaning that if the cup contains twoluggin, it should not weigh more than amaneh. In this way, its walls will not be overly thick.
20.
As mentioned above, in the present age, we rule that any stain that appears red is considered impure. Nevertheless, the technique used by the Rambam is valuable in determining whether a stain is considered as red or not.
21.
This is not speaking about a woman who miscarries, but rather about one who has a problem about the degeneration of her internal organs. The Rambam, based onNiddah 21b, is stating that as long as the piece of flesh is not accompanied by blood, the woman's difficulties do not render her ritually impure.
This ruling is the subject of a difference of opinion in the Talmud and not all Rishonimaccept the Rambam's ruling (see the objections of the Ra'avad and others). It is, however, accepted by the Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 188:3) provided the piece of flesh is small. If, however, it is large, theShulchan Aruch rules that she is impure, because it is impossible for the uterus to open and discharge a large piece of flesh without expelling a certain amount of blood as well. The woman would become impure because of the expulsion of that blood.
(The Maggid Mishneh explains that the difference between the positions of the Rambam and the Ra'avad concerning an issue of a larger scope: Is it possible for the uterus to open without bleeding or not? The Rambam rules that this possible and hence, the woman is pure even if the piece is large. The Ra'avad maintains that she is impure, because it is impossible for the uterus to open without bleeding.)
22.
The Rambam's opinion here is also contested by other Rishonim. The Tur(Yoreh De'ah 188) rules that even if the piece of flesh is accompanied by blood and the blood touches the woman's body, she is not impure, for this is not the ordinary way in which a woman experiences uterine bleeding. This ruling is quoted by theShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 188:3).
23.
See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 188:6) which quotes the Ra'avad's view that whenever a woman discovers a particle of dried blood, she is impure, even if it does not dissolve. The Shulchan Aruch, however, also quotes the views of Rav Zerachiah HaLevi and Rabbenu Asher who maintain that even in such an instance, the ruling depends on whether the particle dissolves or not.
24.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 194:3) follows the ruling of other Rishonim who maintain that in such a situation, we assume that these forms are the preliminary stages of a fetus. Hence, the woman is impure - as if she had miscarried - whether or not bleeding accompanies the expulsion of these forms.
25.
See Shulchan Aruch HaRav (Yoreh De'ah188:8) which emphasizes that according to the Shulchan Aruch, this is referring to a thin tube which can be inserted into the uterus without causing the uterus to open substantially. If, however, the tube is thick and the uterus must open substantially, that alone is sufficient to render a woman ritually impure.
26.
The Shulchan Aruch HaRav (loc. cit.) emphasizes that the leniency is not granted because the tube interposes between the blood and the woman's flesh and therefore the literal meaning of the verse is not fulfilled. Instead, the reason is - as the Rambam clarifies - because this is not the ordinary manner in which women expel blood.
27.
As the Rambam explains, we assume that the bleeding comes from the urinary tract and not the uterus. The Rambam's view is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah191:1). The Tur and the Rama cite more stringent views. In practice, a woman with such a condition should consult a gynecologist for a precise determination of her medical condition and give this information to a Rav who - on this basis - will rule on her halachic status.
28.
One might think that these physical sensations indicate the onset of menstruation.
29.
It must be emphasized that all the laws that follow applied only in the Talmudic era. At present, the Jewish people have accepted upon themselves the stringency of considering even the slightest drop of blood as requiring a wait of seven "spotless" days. Accordingly, when a woman suffers hymeneal bleeding - even if she knows that it is not at all connected with her menstrual cycle, she is considered impure and must wait seven "spotless" days (Chapter 11, Halachot 4,8).
Note the comments of the Ra'avad and theKessef Mishneh concerning when this stringency was adopted. Is it of Talmudic origin or was it originated in the post-Talmudic period?
30.
Even if she menstruated, since she has not come of age, we assume that this is an abnormal occurrence which will not repeat itself.
31.
A girl between the age of twelve and twelve and a half who has already manifested signs of physical maturity.
32.
Since she never menstruated before, we assume that she still is suffering hymeneal bleeding and not that she has begun to menstruate.
33.
Since she menstruated before, we recognize the possibility that this is also menstrual blood. Hence, we require the couple to separate. The Ra'avad protests the Rambam's ruling, noting that it follows the position of the School of Shammai, not the School of Hillel. The Maggid Mishnehsupports the Rambam's decision, noting thatNiddah 65b mentions the opinions of two Amoraim which support this view, indicating that in this instance the opinion of the School of Shammai is followed.
34.
I.e., she has reached the age of twelve and half and manifested signs of physical maturity at age twelve.
35.
I.e., that night the couple may engage in relations as many times as they desire. Needless to say, if she has already menstruated, the couple must separate after the first time they engage in relations (Maggid Mishneh).
36.
More specifically, days and nights as stated in the previous halachah.
37.
And also, of course, that the woman has not begun to menstruate. If during the passage of time, she reaches full majority, she is given only one night from that time onward (Rabbi Akiva Eiger).
38.
As stated in Halachah 19. Thus she is given three more opportunities to engage in relations.
39.
Since she is sitting on a soft surface, the wound will not be aggravated.
40.
Even though her bleeding is not consistent.
41.
Hence she is deemed impure and forbidden to engage in relations with her husband.
42.
Hence we do not apply all the stringencies mentioned in the conclusion of ch. 4.
---------------------
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Sunday, Adar I 5, 5776 · 14 February 2016
Wednesday 5 Adar I 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: T'ruma, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 29-34.
Tanya: For there are (p. 117)...forth on high. (p. 119).
There is not the vaguest shadow of doubt that, wherever our feet tread, it is all in order to cleanse and purify the world with words of Torah and tefilla (prayer). We, all of Israel, are emissaries of G-d, each of us as Divine Providence has decreed for us. None of us is free from this sacred task placed on our shoulders.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Sunday, Adar I 5, 5776 · 14 February 2016
Wednesday 5 Adar I 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: T'ruma, Revi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 29-34.
Tanya: For there are (p. 117)...forth on high. (p. 119).
There is not the vaguest shadow of doubt that, wherever our feet tread, it is all in order to cleanse and purify the world with words of Torah and tefilla (prayer). We, all of Israel, are emissaries of G-d, each of us as Divine Providence has decreed for us. None of us is free from this sacred task placed on our shoulders.
---------------------• Daily Thought:
Release
Beginnings are hard. For good reason. If they were easy, we would prowl into each new venture like a snug fat cat.
When you begin pent up in an iron cage, a new life emerges. A tiger that breaks through the door of its cage and pounces with a vengeance.
Bless those cages, those impossible brick walls, those rivers of fire that lie at the outset of each worthwhile journey. Without them we would be only as powerful as we appear.
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment