Today's Laws & Customs:
• The "Minor" Shushan Purim
In regular years, the 15th of Adar is Shushan Purim, the festival that celebrates -- in Jerusalem and other ancient walled cities -- the salvation of the Jewish people from Haman's evil decree in the year 3405 from creation (356 BCE). In a leap year -- which has two Adars -- Shushan Purim is observed in Adar II, and the 15th of Adar I is designated as Shushan Purim Kattan, the "Minor Shushan Purim."
There are no special observances associated with Shushan Purim Kattan, other than the omission of Tachnun ("supplications") from the daily prayers and a prohibition against fasting or holding eulogies on this day. The Code of Jewish Law cites an opinion that one should increase in festivity and joy, but rules that there is no obligation to do so; "Nevertheless,a person should increase somewhat in festivity... for 'One who is of good heart is festive always' " (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 697:1).
Link: Always Happy
All about Purim
Daily Quote:
The world is not the place of G-d -- G-d is the place of the world..[Midrash Rabbah]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Ki Tisa, 4th Portion Exodus 33:17-33:23 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 33
17And the Lord said to Moses: "Even this thing that you have spoken, I will do, for you have found favor in My eyes, and I have known you by name." יזוַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהֹוָה֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה גַּ֣ם אֶת־הַדָּבָ֥ר הַזֶּ֛ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר דִּבַּ֖רְתָּ אֶֽעֱשֶׂ֑ה כִּֽי־מָצָ֤אתָ חֵן֙ בְּעֵינַ֔י וָֽאֵדָֽעֲךָ֖ בְּשֵֽׁם:
Even this thing: [namely] that My Shechinah should no longer rest upon heathens, I will do. Balaam’s [i.e., the gentile prophet] words did not come about through the resting of the Shechinah [on him], but [his prophecy would occur when] he would “fall and his eyes would be unveiled” (Num. 24:4); such as “Now a word was conveyed secretly to me” (Job 4:12). They [these heathen prophets] would hear [the prophecy] through a messenger. גם את הדבר הזה: שלא יושרה שכינתי עוד על אומות העולם, אעשה, ואין דבריו של בלעם על ידי שריית שכינה, אלא נופל וגלוי עינים, כגון (איוב ד יב) ואלי דבר יגונב, שומעין על ידי שליח:
18And he said: "Show me, now, Your glory!" יחוַיֹּאמַ֑ר הַרְאֵ֥נִי נָ֖א אֶת־כְּבֹדֶֽךָ:
And he said: “Show me, now, Your glory!”: Moses perceived that it was a time of [God’s] good will, and his words were accepted, so he continued to ask that He show him the appearance of His glory. ויאמר הראני נא את כבודך: ראה משה שהיה עת רצון ודבריו מקובלים, והוסיף לשאול לראותו מראית כבודו:
19He said: "I will let all My goodness pass before you; I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you, and I will favor when I wish to favor, and I will have compassion when I wish to have compassion." יטוַיֹּ֗אמֶר אֲנִ֨י אַֽעֲבִ֤יר כָּל־טוּבִי֙ עַל־פָּנֶ֔יךָ וְקָרָ֧אתִי בְשֵׁ֛ם יְהֹוָ֖ה לְפָנֶ֑יךָ וְחַנֹּתִי֙ אֶת־אֲשֶׁ֣ר אָחֹ֔ן וְרִֽחַמְתִּ֖י אֶת־אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֲרַחֵֽם:
He said: “I will let… pass before you”: The time has come that you shall see some of My glory that I will permit you to see, because I want and I need to teach you the order of prayer. Because when you had to beg mercy for Israel, you begged Me to remember the merit of the Patriarchs. You think that if the merit of the Patriarchs is depleted, there is no longer any hope. I will [therefore] let all the attribute of My goodness pass before you while you are hidden in a cave. ויאמר אני אעביר וגו': הגיעה שעה, שתראה בכבודי מה שארשה אותך לראות, לפי שאני רוצה וצריך ללמדך סדר תפלה, שכשנצרכת לבקש רחמים על ישראל, הזכרת לי זכות אבות, כסבור אתה, שאם תמה זכות אבות אין עוד תקוה, אני אעביר כל מדת טובי לפניך על הצור, ואתה צפון במערה:
I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you: to teach you the procedure for begging for compassion [i.e., praying] even if the merit of the Patriarchs is depleted. According to this procedure, [during] which you [will] see Me enwrapped [see commentary on Exod. 34:6] and proclaiming the Thirteen Attributes, teach the Israelites to do likewise. Through their mentioning before Me [the words] “Compassionate and gracious,” they will be answered, for My compassion never ends. -[from Rosh Hashanah 17b] וקראתי בשם ה' לפניך: ללמדך סדר בקשת רחמים אף אם תכלה זכות אבות, וכסדר זה שאתה רואה אותי מעוטף וקרא י"ג מדות הוי מלמד את ישראל לעשות כן, ועל ידי שיזכירו לפני רחום וחנון יהיו נענין כי רחמי לא כלים:
and I will favor when I wish to favor: [At] those times that I will want to [show] favor. וחנתי את אשר אחן: אותן פעמים שארצה לחון:
and I will have compassion: At the time I will want to have compassion. Until this point, He promised him [Moses] only that “at times I will answer, and at times I will not answer.” At the time of the deed [when God revealed to Moses the Thirteen Attributes], however, He said to him, “Behold! I will form a covenant” (Exod. 34:10). He promised him that they [the Israelites] would never return empty [i.e., without an answer to their prayers]. -[from Rosh Hashanah 17b] ורחמתי: עת שאחפוץ לרחם. עד כאן לא הבטיחו אלא עתים אענה עתים לא אענה, אבל בשעת מעשה אמר לו (שמות לד י) הנה אנכי כורת ברית, הבטיחו שאינן חוזרות ריקם:
20And He said, "You will not be able to see My face, for man shall not see Me and live." כוַיֹּ֕אמֶר לֹ֥א תוּכַ֖ל לִרְאֹ֣ת אֶת־פָּנָ֑י כִּ֛י לֹֽא־יִרְאַ֥נִי הָֽאָדָ֖ם וָחָֽי:
And He said, “You will not be able…”: Even when I let all My goodness pass before you, I [still] do not grant you permission to see My face. ויאמר לא תוכל וגו': אף כשאעביר כל טובי על פניך איני נותן לך רשות לראות את פני:
21And the Lord said: "Behold, there is a place with Me, and you shall stand on the rock. כאוַיֹּ֣אמֶר יְהֹוָ֔ה הִנֵּ֥ה מָק֖וֹם אִתִּ֑י וְנִצַּבְתָּ֖ עַל־הַצּֽוּר:
Behold, there is a place with Me: on the mountain, where I always speak to you. I have a place prepared for your benefit, where I will hide you so that you will not be hurt, and from there you shall see what you shall see. This is its simple meaning, but its midrashic meaning is that [God] is speaking of the place where the Shechinah is, and He says: “The place is with Me,” but He does not say: “I am in the place,” for the Holy One, blessed is He, is the place of the world [i.e., the world is within Him], but the world is not His place [i.e., the world does not encompass him] (Gen. Rabbah 68:9). הנה מקום אתי: בהר אשר אני מדבר עמך תמיד, יש מקום מוכן לי לצרכך שאטמינך שם שלא תזוק, ומשם תראה מה שתראה, זהו פשוטו. ומדרשו על מקום שהשכינה שם מדבר ואומר המקום אתי, ואיני אומר אני במקום, שהקב"ה מקומו של עולם ואין עולמו מקומו:
22And it shall be that when My glory passes by, I will place you into the cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with My hand until I have passed by. כבוְהָיָה֙ בַּֽעֲבֹ֣ר כְּבֹדִ֔י וְשַׂמְתִּ֖יךָ בְּנִקְרַ֣ת הַצּ֑וּר וְשַׂכֹּתִ֥י כַפִּ֛י עָלֶ֖יךָ עַד־עָבְרִֽי:
when My glory passes by: When I pass by before you. בעבור כבודי: כשאעבור לפניך:
into the cleft of the rock: Heb. בְּנִקְרַתהַצוּר, like [the following verses:] Even if you pick out ךְתִּנַקֵּר those people’s eyes” (Num. 16:14); “May the ravens of the valley pick it out (יִקְּרוּה) ” (Prov. 30:17); [and] “I dug (קַרְךְתִּי) and drank water” (Isa. 37:25). [All] these [examples] have one root (קר). נִקְרַתהַצוּר means the digging out of the rock [i.e., the cleft]. בנקרת הצור: כמו (במדבר טז יד) העיני האנשים ההם תנקר, (משלי ל יז) יקרוה עורבי נחל, (מלכים ב' יט כד) אני קרתי ושתיתי מים, גזרה אחת להם, נקרת הצור כריית הצור:
and I will cover you with My hand: From here [we understand] that power was given to destructive forces to destroy [Moses] (Num. Rabbah 14:19). Its Aramaic translation is וְאָגֵין בְּמֵימְרִי, and I will protect with My word. This is a euphemism out of honor of the Most High, for He does not need to cover over him [Moses] with an actual hand. ושכתי כפי: מכאן שנתנה רשות למחבלים לחבל, ותרגומו ואגין במימרי, כנוי הוא לדרך כבוד של מעלה, שאינו צריך לסוכך עליו בכף ממש:
23Then I will remove My hand, and you will see My back but My face shall not be seen." כגוַֽהֲסִֽרֹתִי֙ אֶת־כַּפִּ֔י וְרָאִ֖יתָ אֶת־אֲחֹרָ֑י וּפָנַ֖י לֹ֥א יֵֽרָאֽוּ:
Then I will remove My hand: [Onkelos renders:] Then I will remove the guidance [i.e., My guidance] of My glory, when the guidance of My glory passes by from opposite your face, to go further from there [this means that even Moses would not be permitted to grasp the essence of God, only His attributes and His deeds (Nethinah LaGer)]. והסרותי את כפי: ואעדי ית דברת יקרי, כשאסלק הנהגת כבודי מנגד פניך ללכת משם ולהלן:
and you will see My back: [Then] He showed him the knot of the tefillin. -[from Ber. 7a] וראית את אחורי: הראהו קשר של תפילין:
-----------------------
1. For the Conductor, on the yedutun,1 by Asaph, a psalm.
2. [I raise] my voice to God and cry out; [I raise] my voice to God and He will listen to me.
3. On the day of my distress I sought my Lord. My wound oozes at night and does not abate; my soul refuses to be consoled.
4. I remember God and I moan; I speak and my spirit faints, Selah.
5. You grasped my eyelids; I am broken, I cannot speak.
6. I think of olden days, of ancient years.
7. During the night I recall my music, I meditate with my heart, and my spirit searches:
8. Is it for eternity that my Lord forsakes [me], nevermore to be appeased?
9. Has His kindness ceased forever? Has He sealed the decree for all generations?
10. Has God forgotten mercy? Has He in anger restrained His compassion forever?
11. I said, "It is to ter- rify me that the right hand of the Most High changes.”
12. I remember the deeds of Yah, when I remember Your wonders of long ago.
13. I meditate on all Your works, and speak of Your deeds.
14. O God, Your way is in sanctity; what god is as great as God?
15. You are the God Who works wonders; You make Your might known among the nations.
16. You redeemed Your people with a mighty arm, the children of Jacob and Joseph, Selah.
17. The waters2 saw You, O God, the waters saw You and trembled; even the deep shuddered.
18. The clouds streamed water, the heavens sounded forth, even Your arrows flew about.
19. The sound of Your thunder was in the rolling wind; lightning lit up the world; the earth trembled and quaked.
20. Your way was through the sea, Your path through the mighty waters; and Your footsteps were not known.3
21. You led Your people like a flock, by the hand of Moses and Aaron
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument(Metzudot).
2.Of the Red Sea.
3.The waters returned to cover the trail.
Chapter 78
This psalm recounts all the miracles that God wrought for Israel, from the exodus of Egypt to David's becoming king over Israel.
1. A maskil1 by Asaph. Listen, my people, to my teaching; incline your ear to the words of my mouth.
2. I will open my mouth with a parable, I will utter riddles of long ago;
3. that which we have heard and know [to be true], and that our fathers have told us.
4. We will not withhold from their children, telling the final generation the praises of the Lord, and His might, and the wonders He has performed.
5. He established a testimony in Jacob, and set down the Torah in Israel, which He commanded our fathers to make known to their children,
6. so that the last generation shall know; children yet to be born will rise and tell their children,
7. and they shall put their hope in God, and not forget the works of the Almighty; and they shall guard His commandments.
8. And they shall not be like their fathers, a wayward and rebellious generation, a generation that did not set its heart straight, and whose spirit was not faithful to God.
9. The children of Ephraim, armed archers, retreated on the day of battle.2
10. They did not keep the covenant of God, and refused to follow His Torah.
11. They forgot His deeds and His wonders that He had shown them.
12. He performed wonders before their fathers, in the land of Egypt, in the field of Zoan.3
13. He split the sea and brought them across; He erected the waters like a wall.
14. He led them with a cloud by day, and all night long with the light of fire.
15. He split rocks in the wilderness, and gave them to drink as if from the abundant depths.
16. And He brought forth flowing waters from the rock, and caused waters to descend like rivers.
17. Yet they again continued to sin against Him, to provoke the Most High in the parched land.
18. And they tested God in their hearts, by requesting food for their craving.
19. They spoke against God; they said, "Can God set a table in the wilderness?
20. True, He hit the rock and waters flowed, streams gushed forth; but can He also give bread? Will He prepare meat for His people?”
21. And so the Lord heard and was enraged; a fire was kindled against Jacob; wrath, too, flared against Israel.
22. For they did not believe in God and did not trust in His salvation,
23. [though] He had commanded the skies above, and opened the doors of heaven.
24. He had rained upon them manna to eat, and given them grain of heaven.
25. Man ate the bread of angels; He sent them [enough] provisions to satiate.
26. He drove the east wind through the heaven, and led the south wind with His might.
27. He rained meat upon them like dust, winged birds like the sand of seas;
28. and He dropped them inside His camp, around His dwellings.
29. And they ate and were very satiated, for He brought them their desire.
30. They were not yet estranged from their craving, their food was still in their mouths,
31. when the wrath of God rose against them and slew their mighty ones, and brought down the chosen of Israel.
32. Despite this, they sinned again, and did not believe in His wonders;
33. so He ended their days in futility, and their years in terror.
34. When He slew them they would seek Him, they would return and pray to God.
35. They remembered that God is their rock, God the Most High, their redeemer.
36. But they beguiled Him with their mouth, and deceived Him with their tongue.
37. Their heart was not steadfast with Him; they were not faithful to His covenant.
38. Yet He is compassionate, pardons iniquity, and does not destroy; time and again He turns away His anger, and does not arouse all His wrath.
39. He remembered that they were but flesh, a spirit that leaves and does not return.
40. How often they provoked Him in the desert, and grieved Him in the wasteland!
41. Again and again they tested God, and sought a sign from the Holy One of Israel.
42. They did not remember His hand, the day He redeemed them from the oppressor;
43. that He set His signs in Egypt, and His wonders in the field of Zoan.
44. He turned their rivers to blood, and made their flowing waters undrinkable.
45. He sent against them a mixture of beasts which devoured them, and frogs that destroyed them.
46. He gave their produce to the grasshopper, and their toil to the locust.
47. He killed their vines with hail, and their sycamores with biting frost.
48. He delivered their animals to the hail, and their livestock to fiery bolts.
49. He sent against them His fierce anger, fury, rage, and affliction; a delegation of messengers of evil.
50. He leveled a path for His anger, and did not spare their soul from death; He delivered their animals to pestilence.
51. He struck every firstborn in Egypt, the first fruit of their strength in the tents of Ham.4
52. He drove His nation like sheep, and guided them like a flock in the desert.
53. He led them in security and they did not fear, for the sea covered their enemies.
54. And He brought them to the boundary of His holy place, this mountain which His right hand acquired.
55. He drove out nations before them, and allotted them an inheritance [measured] by the cord; He settled the tribes of Israel in their tents.
56. Yet they tested and defied God, the Most High, and did not keep His testimonies.
57. They regressed and rebelled like their fathers; they turned around like a deceptive bow.
58. They angered Him with their high altars, and provoked Him with their idols.
59. God heard and was enraged, and He was utterly disgusted with Israel;
60. And He abandoned the Tabernacle of Shilo, the Tent where He had dwelled among men.
61. He put His might into captivity, and His glory into the hand of the oppressor.
62. He delivered His nation to the sword, and was enraged with His inheritance.
63. Fire consumed His young men, and His maidens had no marriage song.
64. His priests fell by the sword, and their widows did not weep.5
65. And the Lord awoke like one who had been asleep, like a warrior shouting [to sober himself] from wine.
66. He beat His enemies into retreat, and dealt them eternal disgrace.
67. He was disgusted with the tent of Joseph, and did not choose the tribe of Ephraim.
68. He chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion which He loves.
69. And He built His Sanctuary [permanent as] the heavens; like the earth, He established it forever.
70. And He chose David His servant, and took him from the sheep corrals.
71. From following the nursing ewes, He brought Him to shepherd His nation Jacob, Israel His inheritance.
72. And he tended them with the integrity of his heart, and led them with the skill of his hands.
FOOTNOTES
1.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
2.The Ephraimites escaped Egypt before the other tribes, but were defeated when trying to enter the land of Canaan.
3.Capital of Egypt (Radak).
4.Progenitor of the Egyptians.
5.They died before being able to weep (Targum).
• Wednesday, Adar I 15, 5776 · February 24, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 29
עוד ישים אל לבו רוב חלומותיו שהם הבל ורעות רוח, משום שאין נפשו עולה למעלה, וכמו שכתוב: מי יעלה בהר ה׳...נקי כפים וגו׳
Let him further consider his dreams in order to humble his spirit; for one may learn more about himself from his dreams than from his waking, conscious thoughts. For the most part, they are “vanity, and an affliction of the spirit,” 1for his soul does not ascend heavenward during his sleep; since it is written: 2 “Who shall ascend the mountain of the Lord?” — meaning, in our context, “Whose soul shall rise heavenward while he sleeps, to see and absorb matters of Torah and holiness, which will in turn be reflected in his dreams?” And the next verse gives the answer: “He that has clean hands and a pure heart” — implying that the soul of one whose hands and heart are not pure, does not ascend, and that is why his dreams are a patchwork of vanity and foolishness.
ואינון סטרין בישין אתיין ומתדבקן ביה, ומודעין ליה בחלמא מילין דעלמא וכו׳, ולזמנין דחייכן ביה ואחזיאו ליה מילי שקר, וצערין ליה בחלמיה כו׳, כמו שכתוב בזהר ויקרא דף כ״ה עמוד א׳ ועמוד ב׳ , עיין שם באריכות
Furthermore, “those originating from the ’evil side‘ come and attach themselves to him and inform him in his dreams of mundane affairs... and sometimes mock him and show him false things and torment him in his dreams,” and so on, as stated in the Zohar on Vayikra (p. 25a,b). See it there discussed at length.
We thus see from the Zohar that one may evaluate himself by studying the content of his dreams. Thereby, he can humble his spirit even if he finds himself free of sin, and in this way he may crush the sitra achra within him, as explained above.
והנה כל מה שיאריך בעניינים אלו במחשבתו, וגם בעיונו בספרים, להיות לבו נשבר בקרבו, ונבזה בעיניו נמאס ככתוב, בתכלית המיאוס, ולמאס חייו ממש, הרי בזה ממאס ומבזה הסטרא אחרא ומשפילה לעפר ומורידה מגדולתה וגסות רוחה וגבהותה, שמגביה את עצמה על אור קדושת נפש האלקית להחשיך אורה
The longer he reflects on these matters, both in his own thoughts and by delving deeply into books which speak of these matters, in order to break down his heart within him and render himself shamed and despised in his own eyes, as is written in the Scriptures, so utterly despised that he despises his very life, — the more he despises and degrades thereby the sitra achra, casting it down to the ground and humbling it from its haughtiness and pride and self-exaltation, wherewith it exalts itself over the light of the divine soul’s holiness, obscuring its radiance.
Up to now, the Alter Rebbe has proposed means of crushing the sitra achra within one’s animal soul by humbling his own spirit through intellectual contemplation. He now turns to another method, that of “raging” against one’s evil impulse, without entering into an analysis of his spiritual level.
וגם ירעים עליה בקול רעש ורוגז להשפילה, כמאמר רז״ל: לעולם ירגיז אדם יצר טוב על יצר הרע, שנאמר: רגזו וגו׳
He should also thunder against it (the sitra achra) with a strong and raging voice in order to humble it, as our Sages state, 3 “A person should always rouse the good impulse against the evil impulse, as it is written, 4 ‘Rage, and sin not.’”
דהיינו לרגוז על נפש הבהמית, שהיא יצרו הרע, בקול רעש ורוגז במחשבתו, לומר לו: אתה רע ורשע ומשוק׳ ומתועב ומנוול וכו׳, ככל השמות שקראו לו חכמינו ז״ל, באמת
This means that one should rage — in his mind — against the animal soul, which is his evil empulse, with a voice of stormy indignation, saying to it: “Indeed, you are truly evil and wicked, abominable, loathsome and disgraceful,” and so forth, using all the epithets by which our Sages have called it. 5
עד מתי תסתיר לפני אור אין סוף ברוך הוא הממלא כל עלמין, היה הוה ויהיה בשוה, גם במקום זה שאני עליו כמו שהיה אור אין סוף ברוך הוא לבדו קודם שנברא העולם, בלי שום שינוי
“How long will you obscure the light of the blessed Ein Sof, which pervades all the worlds; which was, is, and will be the same, even in the very place where I stand, just as the light of the blessed Ein Sof was alone before the world was created — utterly unchanged;
כמו שכתוב: אני ה׳ לא שניתי, כי הוא למעלה מהזמן וכו׳
as it is written: 6 ’I, the L-rd, have not changed,‘ i.e., the fact of creation has wrought no change in Him, for He transcends time, and so on? And therefore, the fact that it is now ’after‘ creation, cannot affect Him.
ואתה מנוול וכו׳ מכחיש האמת הנראה לעינים, דכולא קמיה כלא ממש באמת, בבחינת ראייה חושיית
But you, repulsive one (and so forth) deny the truth which is so plainly visible — that all is truly as nothing in His presence — a truth which is so apparent as to be ’visible to the eye‘!”
והנה על ידי זה יועיל לנפשו האלקית להאיר עיניה באמת יחוד אור אין סוף בראייה חושיית, ולא בחינת שמיעה והבנה לבדה
In this way he will help his divine soul, enlightening its eyes to perceive the truth of the unity of the infinitelight of Ein Sof as though with physical sight, and not merely through the lesser perception of “hearing” and understanding.
כמו שכתוב במקום אחר, שזהו שרש כל העבודה
For, as explained elsewhere, this is the core of the whole [divine] service.
Intellectual comprehension — i.e., the “hearing” — of G‑dliness can lead only to a desire and longing for G‑d; the level of perception described as “sight” leads far higher — to one’s self-nullification before Him.
והטעם: לפי שבאמת אין שום ממשות כלל בסטרא אחרא, שלכן נמשלה לחשך שאין בו שום ממשות כלל, וממילא נדחה מפני האור
The reason that humbling the spirit of the sitra achra is effective in crushing it is that in truth there is no substance whatever in the sitra achra. That is why it is compared to darkness, which has no substance whatsoever, and is automatically banished by the presence of light.
וכך הסטרא אחרא, אף שיש בה חיות הרבה, להחיות כל בעלי חיים הטמאים, ונפשות אומות העולם, וגם נפש הבהמית שבישראל, כנ״ל, מכל מקום הרי כל חיותה אינה מצד עצמה, חס ושלום, אלא מצד הקדושה, כנ״ל, ולכן היא בטלה לגמרי מפני הקדושה, כביטול החשך מפני האור הגשמי, רק שלגבי קדושת נפש האלקית שבאדם, נתן לה הקב״ה רשות ויכולת להגביה עצמה כנגדה, כדי שהאדם יתעורר להתגבר עליה להשפילה על ידי שפלות ונמיכת רוחו, ונבזה בעיניו נמאס
Similarly with the sitra achra. Indeed, it possesses abundant vitality with which to animate all the impure animals and the souls of the nations of the world, and also the animal soul of the Jew, as has been explained. 7 Yet this vitality is not its own, G‑d forbid, but stems from the realm of holiness, for the realm of holiness is the source of all life, including even the life-force of the sitra achra, as has been explained above. 8Therefore it is completely nullified in the presence of holiness, as darkness is nullified in the presence of physical light. Its power lies only in the fact that in regard to the holiness of man’s divine soul, G‑d has given it(— the sitra achra) permission and ability to raise itself against it (— the divine soul), in order that man should be roused to overpower it and to humble it by means of the humility and submission of his spirit, and by being abhorrent and despised in his own eyes — for through this he humbles the sitra achra and abhors it.
ובאתערותא דלתתא: אתערותא דלעילא, לקיים מה שכתוב: משם אורידך, נאם ה׳
The arousal of man below to crush the sitra achra causes an arousal above, to fulfill what is written: 9 “From there will I bring you down, says G‑d” to the sitra achra, which seeks to rise against G‑dliness and to obscure it.
דהיינו שמסירה מממשלתה ויכלתה, ומסלק ממנה הכח ורשות שנתן לה להגביה עצמה נגד אור קדושת נפש האלקית
This means that He deprives it of its dominion and power, and withdraws from it the strength and authority which had been given it to rise up against the light of the holiness of the divine soul.
ואזי ממילא בטילה ונדחית, כביטול החשך מפני אור הגשמי
Thereupon it automatically becomes nullified and is banished, just as darkness is nullified before physical light.
וכמו שמצינו דבר זה מפורש בתורה גבי מרגלים, שמתחלה אמרו: כי חזק הוא ממנו, אל תקרי ממנו כו׳, שלא האמינו ביכולת ה׳, ואחר כך חזרו ואמרו: הננו ועלינו וגו׳
Indeed, we find this explicitly stated in the Torah in connection with the Spies sent by Moses to scout out the Holy Land. At the outset they declared: 10 “For he (the enemy) is stronger than we,” and, interpreting the wordממנו , the Sages say: 11
“Read not 'than we,' but 'than He,'” meaning that they had no faith in G‑d’s ability to lead them into the Holy Land. But afterwards they reversed themselves and announced: 12 “We will readily go up [to conquer the Land].”
ומאין חזרה ובאה אליהם האמונה ביכולת ה׳, הרי לא הראה להם משה רבנו עליו השלום שום אות ומופת על זה בנתיים, רק שאמר להם איך שקצף ה׳ עליהם ונשבע שלא להביאם אל האר׳
Whence did their faith in G‑d’s ability return to them? Our teacher Moses, peace unto him, had not shown them in the interim any sign or miracle concerning this, which would restore their faith. He had merely told them that G‑d was angry with them and had sworn not to allow them to enter the Land. 13
ומה הועיל זה להם אם לא היו מאמינים ביכולת ה׳, חס ושלום, לכבוש ל״א מלכים, ומפני זה לא רצו כלל ליכנס לאר׳
What value did this Divine anger and oath have to them, if in any case they did not believe in G‑d’s ability to subdue the thirty-one kings14 who reigned in the Land at that time, for which reason they had had no desire whatever to enter the Land?
אלא ודאי מפני שישראל עצמן הם מאמינים בני מאמינים, רק שהסטרא אחרא המלובשת בגופם הגביה עצמה על אור קדושת נפשם האלקית, בגסות רוחה וגבהותה בחוצפה בלי טעם ודעת
Surely, then, the explanation is as follows: Israelites themselves are15 “believers, [being] the descendants of believers.” Even while they stated, “The enemy is stronger than He,” their divine soul still believed in G‑d. They professed a lack of faith in His ability only because the sitra achra clothed in their body in the person of their animal soul had risen against the light of the holiness of the divine soul, with its characteristic impudent arrogance and haughtiness, without sense or reason.
ולכן מיד שקצף ה׳ עליהם והרעים בקול רעש ורוגז: עד מתי לעדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳ במדבר הזה יפלו פגריכם וגו׳ אני ה׳ דברתי אם לא זאת אעשה לכל העדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳, וכששמעו דברים קשים אלו, נכנע ונשבר לבם בקרבם, כדכתיב: ויתאבלו העם מאד, וממילא נפלה הסטרא אחרא מממשלתה וגבהותה וגסות רוחה
Therefore as soon as G‑d became angry with them, and thundered angrily: 16 “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation…,Your carcasses shall fall in this wilderness…I, G‑d, have spoken: I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation...,” — their heart was humbled and broken within them when they heard these stern words, as it is written, 17 “And the people mourned greatly.” Consequently, thesitra achra toppled from its dominion, from its haughtiness and arrogance.
וישראל עצמן הם מאמינים
But the Israelites themselves i.e., as far as their divine soul was concerned had believed in G‑d all along.
Therefore, as soon as they were released from the dominion of the sitra achra, they proclaimed, “We will readily go up...” There was no need of a miracle to convince them of G‑d’s ability. All that was necessary was to divest the sitra achra of its arrogance, and this was accomplished by G‑d’s “raging” at them.
Similarly with every Jew: When the light of his soul does not penetrate his heart, it is merely due to the arrogance of thesitra achra, which will vanish as soon as he rages at it.
ומזה יכול ללמוד כל אדם שנופלים לו במחשבתו ספיקות על אמונה כי הם דברי רוח הסטרא אחרא לבדה, המגביה עצמה על נפשו, אבל ישראל עצמן הם מאמינים כו׳
Every person in whose mind there occur doubts concerning faith in G‑d can deduce from this episode of the Spies that these doubts are nothing but the empty words of the sitra achra which raises itself against hisdivine soul. But Israelites themselves are believers...
וגם הסטרא אחרא עצמה אין לה ספיקות כלל באמונה, רק שניתן לה רשות לבלבל האדם בדברי שקר ומרמה להרבות שכרו
Furthermore, the sitra achra itself entertains no doubts at all concerning faith. As explained in ch. 22, thekelipah in its spiritual state (i.e., when not clothed in the human body) does not deny G‑d’s sovereignty. It has merely been granted permission to confuse man with false and deceitful words, in order that he may be more richly rewarded for mastering it.
כפיתויי הזונה לבן המלך בשקר ומרמה ברשות המלך, כמו שכתוב בזהר הקדוש
In this it is similar to the harlot who attempts to seduce the king’s son through falsehood and deceit, with the king’s approval, as in the parable narrated in the holy Zohar.18
The parable: A king hires a harlot to seduce his son, so that the prince will reveal his wisdom in resisting her wiles. The harlot herself, knowing the king’s intention, does not want the prince to submit to temptation. Similarly with the sitra achra:it is merely fulfilling its G‑d-given task in attempting to lure man away from G‑d, but actually desires that man resist it, thereby earning a greater reward.
However, this is true only of the spiritual kelipah which is the source of the animal soul. The animal soul and evil impulse as clothed within man, on the other hand, are truly evil, and their unequivocal aim is to entice man to do evil.
In the context of the parable, this may be described as follows: The harlot originally commissioned by the king subcontracts a second harlot, and the second a third, and so on. As the actual executor of the mission becomes successively further removed from the king, the original intention is lost, and finally the prince is approached by a harlot who has her own intentions in mind, not those of the king, as she attempts to seduce the prince.
In any event, we see that any doubts one may have concerning faith in G‑d, are merely the empty words of the sitra achra.The soul within every Jew, however, believes in G‑d with a perfect faith.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | See ch. 6. |
| 2. | Tehillim 24:3,4. |
| 3. | Berachot 5a. |
| 4. | Tehillim 4:5. |
| 5. | Sukkah 52a. |
| 6. | Malachi 3:6. |
| 7. | Chs. 6, 7. |
| 8. | Chs. 6, 22. |
| 9. | Ovadiah 1:4. |
| 10. | Bamidbar 13:31. |
| 11. | Sotah 35a; Menachot 53b. |
| 12. | Bamidbar 14:40. |
| 13. | Ibid., v. 39. |
| 14. | Enumerated in Yehoshua 12. |
| 15. | Bamidbar Rabbah 7:5. |
| 16. | Bamidbar 14:27, 29, 35. |
| 17. | Ibid., v. 39. |
| 18. | II, 163a. See above, end of ch. 9 |
---------------------
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Wednesday, Adar I 15, 5776 · February 24, 2016
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 181
The Injured Animal
"You shall not eat any meat that is torn in the field"—Exodus 22:30.
It is forbidden to consume the flesh of an animal that has been attacked by another animal and sustained life-threatening injuries, or an animal that has sustained such injuries in another manner, even if it has been ritually slaughtered.
The fact that the Torah employs the words "in the field" when issuing this prohibition teaches us that certain other meats that have "left their natural borders" are also forbidden. This includes flesh of a sacrifice that has left its confines (e.g., the flesh of a "holy of holies" sacrifice that left the Temple Courtyard), and the fetus that has extended an arm [or leg outside his mother's womb and then its mother was slaughtered before it was born—this limb is forever forbidden for consumption].
This prohibition also includes any flesh torn from a living animal.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 182
The Limb of a Living Animal
"And you may not eat the life with the meat"—Deuteronomy 12:23.
It is forbidden to eat a complete limb removed from a living animal.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 184
Consuming Blood
"You shall not eat any blood"—Leviticus 7:26.
It is forbidden to consume [a kosher mammal or bird's] blood. This prohibition is repeated several times in the Torah.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 185
Forbidden Fats
"You shall eat no fat of an ox, sheep, or goat"—Leviticus 7:23.
It is forbidden to consume [certain] fats [that were offered on the Temple Altar] of kosher domesticated animals.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 183
The Sciatic Nerve
"Therefore the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve"—Genesis 32:33.
It is forbidden to consume an animal's sciatic nerve.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Wednesday, Adar I 15, 5776 · February 24, 2016Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Negative Commandment 181
The Injured Animal
"You shall not eat any meat that is torn in the field"—Exodus 22:30.
It is forbidden to consume the flesh of an animal that has been attacked by another animal and sustained life-threatening injuries, or an animal that has sustained such injuries in another manner, even if it has been ritually slaughtered.
The fact that the Torah employs the words "in the field" when issuing this prohibition teaches us that certain other meats that have "left their natural borders" are also forbidden. This includes flesh of a sacrifice that has left its confines (e.g., the flesh of a "holy of holies" sacrifice that left the Temple Courtyard), and the fetus that has extended an arm [or leg outside his mother's womb and then its mother was slaughtered before it was born—this limb is forever forbidden for consumption].
This prohibition also includes any flesh torn from a living animal.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
The Injured Animal
Negative Commandment 181
Translated by Berel Bell
The 181st prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating [meat from] an animal which is treifa.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,1 "Do not eat flesh torn off (treifa) in the field."
The simple meaning of this verse2 is as explained in the Mechilta, "The verse just speaks of the most common case, [a field being] the place where most animals are torn."
But in the Oral Tradition3 has an additional explanation of this verse: "Flesh in the field is treifa, therefore do not eat it." This means that once the flesh is moved outside its proper place, it is considered to be treifa. Examples of this are meat from kodshei kodshim which was taken outside the Temple courtyard; or meat from kodshim kalim which was taken outside the wall [of Yerushalayim]; or meat from the Pesach offering which was taken away from where its group was; or if a fetus stuck its hand out [of the womb], as explained in the fourth chapter of Chulin. In all these cases the meat is called treifa, and one who eats a kezayis of their flesh receives lashes by Torah law.
Flesh which was taken from a live animal is also considered to be treifa, and one who eats it is punished by lashes. Our Sages said in Gemara Chulin,4 "The verse, 'Do not eat flesh torn off (treifa) in the field,' refers to flesh from a live animal and flesh from a treifa.
This mitzvah, as well as the previous one [regarding neveilah], is repeated with regard to kohanim. This is in G‑d's statement to the kohanim,5 "He shall not eat a neveilah or a treifa, since it will defile him." The reason for the repetition is because they are commanded to eat from a bird which was brought as a sin offering, which is prepared with melikah.6 Melikah, when performed on a non-sanctified bird is undoubtedly neveilah, not valid slaughter. We might think that therefore they are permitted to eat even non-sanctified animals prepared through melikah, as well as any other invalid slaughter. Therefore [the verse] explains that they are included among all other Jews regarding the prohibition of eating neveilah and treifa. This is the explanation given by our Sages, in addition to another law derived from this verse, which we don't need to discuss in the present work.
However, a beheimah or chaya which develops one of the invalidating conditions (treifos) which are derived through the principles of Torah interpretation may not be eaten even if it is slaughtered properly. One who slaughters it in a kosher manner and eats from its flesh receives lashes by Rabbinic decree. The various types of treifos are explained in the third chapter of Chulin. The nine7 previous mitzvos are explained in that same chapter, as well as the last chapter of Makos and the first chapter of B'choros.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 22:30.
2.Particularly why it mentions a field.
3.Chulin 68a.
4.102b.
5.Lev. 22:8.
6.Cutting through the back of the neck with a thumbnail. See N112.
7.N172-N181.
----------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 182
The Limb of a Living Animal
"And you may not eat the life with the meat"—Deuteronomy 12:23.
It is forbidden to eat a complete limb removed from a living animal.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
The Limb of a Living Animal
Negative Commandment 182
Translated by Berel Bell
The 182nd prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating the limb of a living animal. This applies when the limb was cut from the animal while it was still alive, and one eats a kezayis from the limb as it was in its original form.1 Even if there was only a minute amount of actual flesh, one who eats [a kezayis] is punished by lashes.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,2 "Do not eat flesh with life in it."
The Sifri says, "The verse, 'Do not eat flesh with life in it,' refers to the limb of a live animal. The same explanation is given in Gemara Chulin,3 where our Sages said, "One who eats the limb of a live animal and the flesh of a live animal receives two sets of lashes." This is because there are two prohibitions: the first being the prohibition regarding a limb, "Do not eat flesh with life in it," and the second, the prohibition of eating the flesh of a live animal, "Do not eat flesh torn off (treifa) in the field," as explained previously.4
This same prohibition is repeated in other words in G‑d's statement5 to Noah prohibiting the limb of a live animal, "But you may not eat flesh of a creature that is still alive."
FOOTNOTES
1.I.e. including the bones, sinews, etc. In most mitzvos, the Biblical prohibition is transgressed only when a kezayis of the flesh is eaten, excluding bones, etc. Here, since the limb is complete, everything is included in the kezayis.
2.Deut. 12:23.
3.102b.
4.N181.
5.Gen. 9:4.
-------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 184
Consuming Blood
"You shall not eat any blood"—Leviticus 7:26.
It is forbidden to consume [a kosher mammal or bird's] blood. This prohibition is repeated several times in the Torah.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Consuming Blood
Negative Commandment 184
Translated by Berel Bell
The 184th prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating blood.
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,1 "Do not eat any blood." This prohibition is repeated in Torah many times. It explains that one who transgresses intentionally receives kares, as it is written,2 "Whoever eats it shall receive kares." If it was transgressed accidentally, the person must bring a chatos offering.3
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the fifth chapter of tractate Krisus.
FOOTNOTES
1.Lev. 7:26.
2.Ibid. 17:14
3.See P69.
------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 185
Forbidden Fats
"You shall eat no fat of an ox, sheep, or goat"—Leviticus 7:23.
It is forbidden to consume [certain] fats [that were offered on the Temple Altar] of kosher domesticated animals.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Forbidden Fats
Negative Commandment 185
Translated by Berel Bell
The 185th prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating the fats of a kosher animal.1
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,2 "Do not eat any of the hard fat in an ox, sheep or goat."
This prohibition is also repeated and the punishment of kares explicitly stated.3 This applies if he transgressed intentionally, but it was accidental, he must bring a chatos offering.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 7th chapter of tractate Chulin.
FOOTNOTES
1.The fat of a nonkosher animal is already forbidden just as the flesh is.
2.Lev. 7:23.
3.Ibid. 7:25.
-------------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 183
The Sciatic Nerve
"Therefore the children of Israel shall not eat the sciatic nerve"—Genesis 32:33.
It is forbidden to consume an animal's sciatic nerve.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
The Sciatic Nerve
Negative Commandment 183
Translated by Berel Bell
The 183rd prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating the sciatic nerve (gid ha'nasheh).
The source of this prohibition is G‑d's statement,1 "The Jewish people therefore do not eat the sciatic nerve to this very day."
One who eats the entire nerve, even if it is minute in size, or one who eats a kezayis [even if it is not the entire nerve] receives lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.Gen. 32:33.
-----------------------------------------------------------
• 1 Chapter: Shemita Shemita - Chapter 10 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Shemita - Chapter 10
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Shemita - Chapter 10
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment to count sets of seven years1 and to sanctify the fiftieth year,2 as [Leviticus 25:8-10] states: "And you shall count seven years for yourselves... and you shall sanctify the fiftieth year." These two mitzvot are entrusted to the High Court3 alone.4
Halacha 2
When did the counting begin? After the fourteen years following the entry intoEretz [Yisrael]. [This is derived from Leviticus 25:3]: "Six years shall you sow your field and six years shall you trim your vineyard." [Implied is that] each person must recognize his [portion of the] land. [The people] took seven years to conquer the land and seven years to divide it.5 Thus the counting began after the 2503rd year after the creation, from Rosh HaShanah,6 after the conjunction [of the sun and the moon before the creation] of Adam, which was in the second year of the creation.7 They declared the [two thousand,] five hundred, and tenth year after the creation which was the 21st year after the entry into Eretz Yisrael as the Sabbatical year. They counted seven Sabbatical years and then sanctified the fiftieth year which was the 64th year after they entered Eretz [Yisrael].
Halacha 3
The Jewish people counted 17 Jubilee years8 from the time they entered [Eretz Yisrael] until they departed.9 The year they departed, when the Temple was destroyed the first time, was the year following the Sabbatical year and the 36th year in the Jubilee cycle. For the First Temple stood for 410 years. When it was destroyed, this reckoning ceased.
After it ceased, the land remained desolate for seventy years.10 Then the Second Temple was built and it stood for 420 years. In the seventh year after it was built, Ezra ascended [to Eretz Yisrael]. This is referred to as the second entry.11 From this year, they began another reckoning. They designated the thirteenth year of the Second Temple as the Sabbatical year12 and counted seven Sabbatical years and sanctified the fiftieth year. Although the Jubilee year was not observed in [the era of] the Second Temple,13 they would count it in order to sanctify the Sabbatical years.
Halacha 4
It follows that the year in which the [Second] Temple was destroyed, [more precisely, the year] beginning from Tishrei that was approximately two months after the destruction14 - for the reckoning of Sabbatical and Jubilee years begins in Tishrei - was the year following the Sabbatical year. It was the fifteenth year of the ninth Jubilee cycle.15
Halacha 5
Nevertheless, all of the Geonim have said that they have received a tradition, transferred from teacher to student that in the seventy years between the destruction of the First Temple and the building of the Second Temple, they counted only Sabbatical years, not the Jubilee year. Similarly, after the destruction of the Second Temple, they did not count the fiftieth year. Instead, they counted only sets of seven from the beginning of the year of the destruction. [This interpretation] is also apparent from the Talmud in Avodah Zarah.19 This reckoning is a received tradition.
Halacha 6
[The reckoning of] the Sabbatical year is well-known and renowned among the Geonim and the people of Eretz Yisrael. None of them make any reckoning except according to the years of the destruction.20 According to this reckoning, this year which is the 1107th year after the destruction is the year following the Sabbatical year.21
Halacha 7
The Jubilee year is not counted in the set of Sabbatical years.25 Instead, the 49th year is a Sabbatical year and the fiftieth year is a Jubilee year. Then the 51st year is the first of the six years of the [next] Sabbatical cycle. This is true of every Jubilee year.
Halacha 8
From the time the tribes of Reuven and Gad and half the tribe of Menasheh were exiled,26 [the observance] of the Jubilee year ceased, as [implied byLeviticus 25:10]: "You shall proclaim freedom throughout the land to all of its inhabitants." [One can infer that this commandment applies only] when all of its inhabitants are dwelling within it. [Moreover,] they may not be intermingled, one tribe with another, but rather each tribe is dwelling in its appropriate place.27
Halacha 9
When [the laws of] the Jubilee year are observed, the laws of a Hebrew servant are observed,30 as are the laws of homes in a walled city, the laws of a field given as a dedication offering, and the laws of ancestral fields.31 We accept [a gentile as] a resident alien32 and the Sabbatical year is observed inEretz [Yisrael] and debts are nullified in all places according to Scriptural Law. In the era when the Jubilee year is not observed, none of these mitzvot are observed except the Sabbatical year in Eretz [Yisrael] according to Rabbinic Law and also the nullification of debts in all places according to Rabbinic Law, as we explained.33
Halacha 10
It is a positive commandment to sound the shofar on the tenth of Tishrei34in the Jubilee year.35 This mitzvah is entrusted to the [High] Court first,36 as [Leviticus 25:9] states: "You shall sound a shofar blast. Each and every individual is also obligated to sound the shofar, as [the verse] continues: "and you shall sound the shofar."37
Halacha 11
[The requirements] of shofar used for the Jubilee and Rosh HaShanah are the same in all matters.40 Both on Rosh HaShanah and in the Jubilee the tekiyotare sounded except in the Jubilee year, they are sounded41both in the court that sanctifies the new moon42 and in a court that does not sanctify the moon.43 [Moreover,] for the entire time the court is in session, every individual is obligated to sound [the shofar even] outside the presence of the court.
Halacha 12
When Rosh HaShanah falls on the Sabbath, by contrast, [the shofar] would be sounded only in a court that sanctified the new moon. Every individual may sound [the shofar] only in the presence of the court.44
Halacha 13
Halacha 14
From Rosh HaShanah49 until Yom Kippur, servants would not be released to their homes,50 nor would they be subjugated to their masters,51 nor would the fields return to their [original] owners.52 Instead, the servants would eat, drink, and rejoice, with crowns on their heads. When Yom Kippur arrives and theshofar is sounded in the court, the servants are released to their homes and the fields are returned to their owners.
Halacha 15
With regard to the land being allowed to rest, the laws of the Jubilee year are the same of those of the Sabbatical year. Whatever agricultural labors53 are forbidden54 in the Sabbatical year are forbidden in the Jubilee year. Whatever is permitted in the Sabbatical year is permitted in the Jubilee. Whenever the performance of a labor is punishable by lashes in the Sabbatical year,55 it is punishable by lashes in the Jubilee year. [Similarly,] the laws governing the eating,56 sale,57 and removal58 of the produce of the Jubilee year are the same as those governing the produce of the Sabbatical year in all respects.
Halacha 16
The Sabbatical year has an added dimension lacking in the Jubilee, for debts are nullified in the Sabbatical year,59 and they are not nullified in the Jubilee. The Jubilee year has an added dimension lacking in the Sabbatical year, for in the Jubilee, servants are released and land is released. This refers to the laws regarding the sale of land in the Torah.60 This is a positive commandment,61 as [Leviticus 25:24] states: "You shall grant redemption to the land.
FOOTNOTES
1.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 140) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 330) includes the commandment to count the sets of years among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. As the Rambam states in Sefer HaMitzvot the mitzvah is not to count a 50 year cycle, but rather to count seven sets of seven year cycles.
2.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 136) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 332) includes the commandment to sanctify the fiftieth year among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. In Sefer HaMitzvot, the Rambam explains that the sanctification of the year is reflected in considering the produce of that year ownerless.
3.
The Sanhedrin, the court of 71 judges which served as Judaism's supreme Rabbinic authority.
4.
I.e., their fulfillment is not incumbent on each person individually, but on the people as a whole, and hence, on the High Court, who acts as their agent.
5.
Zevachim 118b derives the fact that it took the Jews seven years to conquer Eretz Yisrael from the statements of Caleb quoted in Joshua 14:7 and it postulates that the division also took seven years.
6.
Avodah Zarah 9a states that the Torah was given in the year 2448, when the forty years the Jews wandered in the desert and the fourteen years that the land was conquered and divided are added, a total of 2502 are reached. Thus the counting began in the 2503rd year.
7.
I.e., our counting begins from the creation of Adam which was on Rosh HaShanah, for Adam's creation superseded the creation that preceded his to the extent that Rosh HaShanah is considered the anniversary of creation and the beginning of the year and not the 25th of Elul even though that date was the first day of creation.
Adam's creation is mentioned as occurring in the second year after creation, because any portion of a year is considered as a year. Thus the five days from the 25th of Elul until Rosh HaShanah are the first year referred to here. Hence, there is a theoretical conjunction of the sun and the moon for that year. See Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 6:8 and notes which mention the day and time of the first conjunction.
8.
I.e., they were in the midst of counting the seventeenth Jubilee as explained in the following note.
9.
I Kings 6:1 relates that the first Temple was built 480 years after the exodus from Egypt. When the 40 years of wandering in the desert and the 14 years when Eretz Yisraelwas conquered and divided is subtracted from that figure, 426 years remain. When the 410 years that the First Temple stood (as stated in Yoma 9a) are added, a total of 836 is reached. 836 divided by 50 equals 16. Thus the Jews were exiled in the 36th year of the seventeenth Jubilee cycle. Note the discussion of the Rambam's wording "17 Jubilees" by the Ra'avad, Radbaz, Kessef Mishneh and others based on Rosh HaShanah 9a.
10.
And for the 70 years of the Babylonian exile, the Jubilee year cycle was not followed. See Halachah 5.
11.
See also Chapter 12, Halachah 15.
12.
For they began counting from Ezra's arrival.
13.
See Halachah 8. The Rambam's intent is that the mitzvot of the Jubilee year were not observed.
14.
For the destruction took place on the ninth of Av.
15.
The Second Temple stood for 420 years (Yoma, loc. cit.). Thus if the reckoning of the Sabbatical and Jubilee years began in its seventh year, there is a total of 414. Eight Jubilee cycles produce a total of 400 years. Thus the year following the destruction was the 415th year and it was the year following the Sabbatical year.
16.
In the Talmudic era, it was customary to date legal documents from the time of Alexander the Great's ascent to the throne. See Hilchot Gerushin 1:27.
17.
This corresponds to 1176 C.E. This date is interesting in another context, for it gives us some insight into the Rambam's writing and editing of the Mishneh Torah. In his Introduction to the Mishneh Torah, the Rambam mentions the date of the composition of the work as 4937, and inHilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 11:16, he speaks of the date 4938. Thus it is apparent that he worked on the text for several years, wrote the Introduction in 4937, and then edited and added to the work in 4938.
18.
I.e., that date is 1121 years after the last Jubilee observed before the destruction of the Second Temple. Thus if that figure is divided by fifty, 21 years are left over. Hence, it is a Sabbatical year.
19.
See Avodah Zarah 9b.
20.
For it is accepted that the year following the destruction was the beginning of a Sabbatical cycle, as stated in Halachah 4.
21.
I.e., when 1107 is divided by 7, there is a remainder of 1.
22.
The Radbaz states that this was the practice in his day and this is the present practice in Eretz Yisrael and throughout the world, for the Rambam's ruling is accepted by both the Beit Yosef and Rama (Choshen Mishpat 67:1). See Sefer Meirat Einayim66:5.
23.
For the obligations of the second tithe and the tithe for the poor depend on the years of the Sabbatical cycle.
24.
I.e., the way the law has actually been observed.
25.
This applies whether the Jubilee year was observed in its full sense, as in most of the First Temple era, or it was merely counted as throughout the Second Temple era.
26.
The tribes of Reuven and Gad and half of the tribe of Menashe were exiled approximately 18 years before the remaining seven and a half tribes. They in turn were exiled approximately 130 years before the destruction of the Temple and exile of the tribe of Judah.
27.
For each tribe was given an ancestral heritage of its own.
28.
With regard to the freeing of Hebrew servants.
29.
I.e., it is the presence of the Jewish people in the land and not the existence of the Temple which determines the land's sanctity.
30.
See Hilchot Avadim, ch. 1-2.
31.
The laws governing the latter three subjects are described in Chapters 12 and 13.
32.
I.e., if a gentile accepts the observance of the Seven Laws Given to the Descendants of Noah, he is granted the right to dwell inEretz Yisrael. See Hilchot Avodat Kochavim10:6; Hilchot Melachim 8:10-11.
33.
See Chapter 9, Halachah 3, with regard to the nullification of debts. With regard to the observance of the Sabbatical year, the Rambam's statements are the subject of a difference of opinion among the commentaries. Our translation follows the version of the text suggested by Rav Yosef Corcus which is accepted by Rav Shabsi Frankel. It is also the conception followed by the Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 331). TheKessef Mishneh, however, interprets the text differently, reading the last line as: "with the exception of the Sabbatical year in Eretz [Yisrael] and, according to Rabbinic Law, the nullification of debts." Some commentaries have suggested that the Rambam's statements in Sefer HaMitzvot (positive mitzvah 135) support this interpretation. Most other Rishonim follow the conception that the observance of the Sabbatical Law is a Rabbinic ordinance in the present era. See also Chapter 12, Halachah 16, and notes and Hilchot Terumah 1:26 and notes.
34.
Yom Kippur.
35.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 137) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 331) includes this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. This mitzvah also includes setting the servants free, as the Rambam mentions in his listing of the mitzvot at the beginning of these halachot.
Sefer Hamitzvot, loc. cit., states that, thematically, this sounding of the shofardiffers from the sounding of the shofar on Rosh HaShanah. On Rosh HaShanah, theshofar is sounded as "a remembrance before God." In the Jubilee, by contrast, the sounding of the shofar is the proclamation of freedom required by the Torah.
The commentaries note that this difference is also reflected in the wording used to describe the commandments. With regard to the sounding of the shofar on Rosh HaShanah, the Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot, positive commandment 170, Hilchot Shofar1:1) states the mitzvah is to hear the sounding of the shofar, while here he states that the mitzvah is to sound the shofar.
36.
I.e., first, the shofar is sounded in the High Court (the Sanhedrin of 71 judges) and then it should be sounded by every individual.
37.
I.e., the verse uses two forms, the first singular, and the second plural, for the same verb. On this basis, it is derived that first, theshofar is sounded by the court for the people as a unified entity, and then, it is sounded by each person individually. SeeRosh HaShanah 30a, 34a.
38.
I.e., sounding three series of tekiah, shevarim, teruah, tekiah blasts. See Hilchot Shofar, ch. 3, for details.
39.
The Or Sameach interprets this phrasing to mean that although the Jubilee is observed in the Diaspora, the shofar is not sounded there.
40.
See Hilchot Shofar 1:1.
41.
I.e., even when Yom Kippur falls on the Sabbath.
42.
I.e., the Sanhedrin of 71 judges.
43.
I.e., an ordinary local court.
44.
See Hilchot Shofar 2:8-9.
45.
I.e., if these three mitzvot are not fulfilled, the Jubilee year is not granted its sanctity (Rosh HaShanah 9b).
46.
This would appear to refer to the sounding of the shofar by the High Court, and not its sounding by every individual.
47.
A Hebrew servant is granted his freedom in the Jubilee year, whether he was sold into slavery on his own initiative or by the court and even if he willingly extended his servitude, as Leviticus 25:40 states: "Until the Jubilee year, he will work with you." SeeHilchot Avadim, ch. 2.
48.
As described in the following chapter.
49.
Even though the laws of the Jubilee year do not take effect until the sounding of theshofar on Yom Kippur, the sanctity of the year begins on Rosh HaShanah [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Rosh HaShanah 1:1)].
50.
Lest the shofar not be sounded in the court and thus the laws of the Jubilee year not apply, as stated in the previous halachah.
51.
For the likelihood is that it will be sounded.
52.
Even though the laws of the Jubilee year do not take effect until the sounding of theshofar on Yom Kippur, the sanctity of the year begins on Rosh HaShanah [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Rosh HaShanah 1:1)].
53.
We have used this translation because both work with the land and work with trees are forbidden in the Sabbatical year. See Chapters 1 and 2 above.
54.
By both Rabbinic and Scriptural Law.
55.
See Chapter 1, Halachah 2.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandments 224-226) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvot 333-335) include the prohibitions against working the land, harvesting the aftergrowth of crops, and harvesting fruit in the Jubilee year among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
56.
I.e., the respect given to the produce of the Sabbatical year, as explained in Chapter 5.
57.
See Chapter 6.
58.
See Chapter 7.
59.
As related in Chapter 9.
60.
See Leviticus 25:23-28.
61.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 138) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 340) includes this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. This mitzvah is described at the beginning of the following chapter.
62.
On Yom Kippur, as stated in Halachah 14.
63.
As stated in Chapter 9, Halachah 4.
---------------------
• 3 Chapters: Ma'achalot Assurot Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 11, Ma'achalot Assurot Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 12, Ma'achalot Assurot Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 13 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 11
Audio: Listen | Download• Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 11
Halacha 1
When wine has been poured as a libation to a false divinity,1 it is forbidden to benefit from it. A person who drinks even the smallest quantity2 of [such wine] is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law. Similarly, anyone who partakes of the smallest quantity of something offered to a false deity, e.g., meat or fruit, even water or salt, is worthy of lashes, as [implied byDeuteronomy 32:38]: "The fat of whose offerings they would eat; they would drink the wine of their libations. Let them stand."3
Halacha 2
Wine poured as a libation to a false deity is like a sacrifice offered to it. Since this prohibition stems from [the prohibition against] the worship of false deities, there is no minimum measure involved, as stated with regard to the worship of false deities [ibid. 13:18]: "Let no trace of the condemned [entity] cling to your hand."4
Halacha 3
When we do not know whether wine belonging to a gentile was used for a libation or not, it is called "ordinary [gentile] wine." It is forbidden to benefit from it, as it is forbidden to benefit from wine used as a libation. [This matter] is a Rabbinic decree.5 When a person drinks a revi'it6 of "ordinary [gentile] wine," he is liable for "stripes for rebellious conduct."7
Halacha 4
It is forbidden [to benefit from] any wine that a gentile touches;8for perhaps he poured it as a libation. For the thought of a gentile is focused on the worship of false deities.9 From this, we learn that it is forbidden to benefit [even from] wine belonging to a Jew which was touched by a gentile; it is governed by the laws that apply to ordinary gentile wine.
Halacha 5
When a gentile touches wine unintentionally10 and similarly, when a gentile child11 touches wine, it is forbidden to drink it,12 but it is permitted to benefit from it.
When one purchases servants from a gentile and they were circumcised and immersed [in the mikveh] immediately,13 they no longer pour libations to false deities.14 It is permitted to drink wine which they touch even though they have yet to conduct themselves according to the Jewish faith and they still speak of idolatry.
Halacha 6
Halacha 7
With regard to a resident alien, i.e., one who accepted the observance of the seven universal laws [commanded to Noah and his descendants],19 as we explained:20 It is forbidden to drink his wine, but it is permitted to benefit from it.21 We may deposit wine in his possession for a short time, but may not entrust it to him for a lengthy period.22
With regard to any gentile who does not serve false deities, e.g., the Arabs:23It is forbidden to drink his wine, but it is permitted to benefit from it. The Geonimrule in this manner. With regard to those who worship false deities,24 by contrast, it is forbidden to benefit from their ordinary wine.
Halacha 8
Whenever it is stated that wine is forbidden in this context, if the gentile who causes the wine to be forbidden worships false deities, it is forbidden to benefit from it. If he does not worship false deities, it is merely forbidden to drink it. Whenever we refer to a gentile without any further description, we mean one who worships false deities.25
Halacha 9
Only wine that is fit to be offered on the altar is used for libations for false deities. Therefore when [our Sages] decreed against ordinary gentile wine, ordaining that it is forbidden to benefit from any wine touched by a gentile, their decree involved only wine that is fit to be used as a libation. Accordingly, wine that was boiled26 that was touched by a gentile is not forbidden. It is permitted to drink it together with a gentile27 in one cup. If, however, [a gentile] touches wine blended [with water] and wine that began to turn into vinegar,28 but can still be drunken is forbidden.
Halacha 10
Halacha 11
When does wine belonging to a gentile become forbidden? When the grapes have been crushed and the wine begins to flow,31 even though it has not descended into the cistern and is still in the wine press, it is forbidden. For this reason, we do not crush grapes together with a gentile in a wine press,32 lest he touch it with his hand33 and offer it as a libation. [This applies] even if he is bound. [Similarly,] we do not purchase a wine press [filled with] crushed [grapes] even if the wine is still mixed with the seeds and peels and has not descended into the cistern.
Halacha 12
Halacha 13
It is forbidden to benefit from vinegar belonging to a gentile, because it became [forbidden like] wine offered as a libation before it became vinegar.37
When a gentile is crushing grapes in a barrel, we are not concerned that the wine [becomes forbidden] as wine used for a libation. If a gentile was eating from the baskets [of grapes brought to a winepress] and left over, a se'ah or two and threw them into the winepress, he does not cause the wine [to become forbidden] as wine used for a libation, even though it spatters over the grapes.38
Halacha 14
Grape seeds and peels belonging to a gentile are forbidden39 for twelve months. After twelve months, they have already dried out, they contain no moisture and they are permitted to be eaten. Similarly, the dregs of wine that have dried out are permitted to be eaten after twelve months.40 [The rationale is that] no trace of wine remains; they are just like dust or earth.
Halacha 15
It is forbidden to put wine in wineskins or barrels in which gentiles had kept wine41 until:
a) they are allowed to dry for twelve months;42
b) they are placed in a fire until their pitch becomes soft or they become hot;43
c) water is placed in them for three days for a full 24 hour period; [one places water in them], pours it out after 24 hours, and puts other water in. [This should be done] three times in three days.
[This applies] whether the containers belong to them or they belonged to a Jew from whom they borrowed them and then placed their wine into them. If one put wine in them before purifying them, it is forbidden to drink [that wine].44
Halacha 16
It is permitted to place beer, fish brine, or fish oil in these containers immediately.45 None of these [purging processes] are necessary. After one placed fish brine or fish oil in them, one may place wine in them, for the salt [in the fish brine or fat] will burn out [any residue of wine].
Halacha 17
When a person purchases new utensils that were not covered with pitch from a gentile, he may place wine in them immediately, he need not worry that gentile wine had been placed in them. If they were covered with pitch, he should wash them thoroughly even though they are new.46
Similarly, [any] utensil in which gentile wine was placed, but was not stored there for an extensive period, e.g., a bucket used to draw wine from a cistern, a funnel, or the like, should be swashed in water. That is sufficient for it.47
Halacha 18
Similarly, it is forbidden to drink from an earthenware cup that a gentile had drunken from. If one washed it thoroughly three times, it is permitted, for all traces of wine have been washed away.48 This applies provided it is glazed with lead as potters do or covered with pitch. If, however, it is of earthenware, washing it thoroughly [once] is [all that is] required.49
Halacha 19
When earthenware utensils that are glazed with lead50 are used for gentile wine, they are permitted51 if they are white, red, or black. If they are green, they are forbidden, because they absorb.52 If they have a portion where the earthenware is revealed,53 they are forbidden54 whether they are white or green, because they absorb.
Halacha 20
When a gentile treads on grapes in a winepress of stone or of wood58 or a gentile applied pitch to a winepress of stone59 even though he did not tread the grapes there, one must wash [the press] thoroughly with water and ashes60 four times. Afterwards, one may tread grapes there. If [the press] is still moist, one should place the ashes in before the water. If it is not moist, one should place the water in first.
Halacha 21
When a gentile treaded [grapes] in a stone winepress covered with pitch or [applied] pitch to a wooden winepress61 even though he did not tread grapes there, one must peel the pitch.62 If one left it for twelve months or placed water in it for three days, it is not necessary to peel [the pitch off].63 [The laws applying to] a winepress need not be more stringent than those applying to barrels.64 [The option of] peeling was given only to allow [the winepress to be used] immediately.65
Halacha 22
An earthenware winepress [is governed by more stringent rules].66Even if one peels the pitch, it is forbidden to tread grapes in it immediately. [Instead, one must] heat it with fire until the pitch softens. If, however, one leaves it for twelve months or places water in it for three successive days, it is permitted,67as we explained.68
Halacha 23
[The following laws apply to] a filter that had been used for wine belonging to a gentile. If it is made of hair, it should be washed thoroughly69 and then it may be used as a filter. If it is made from wool, it should be washed thoroughly four times with water and ashes and then left it70 until it dries. If it was from flax,71 it should be left for twelve months. If it has knots, they should be untied [before the filter is washed out].72
Similar [laws apply with regard to] utensils from reeds,73 from date bast, or similar utensils like wicker baskets that are used to tread grapes. If they were sewed with ropes, they should be washed thoroughly. If they are tangled together with snarls that are difficult to undo, they should be washed four times with ashes and with water. [After] they are dried, they may be used. If they are sewed with flax, they should be left unused for twelve months. If they have knots, they should be untied.74
Halacha 24
How can the utensils of a winepress used by a gentile for gentile wine be purified so that a Jew may use them? The boards,75 the balls of clay,76and the palm branches77 should be washed thoroughly. The restraints78 of wood and of canvas should be dried out.79 Those from water grasses and from bullrushes should be left unused for twelve months.
Halacha 25
In the era when the land of Israel was entirely within the possession of the Jewish people, it was permitted to purchase wine from any Jewish person without holding anyone in suspicion.83 In the Diaspora, they would only purchase [wine] from a person whose reputation [for observance] has been established. In the present age, in every place, we only purchase wine from a person whose reputation for observance has been established.84These laws also apply to meat, cheese, and a cut of fish that does not have a sign as we explained.85
Halacha 26
When a person enjoys the hospitality of a homeowner in any place and at any time and that homeowner brings him wine, meat, cheese, or a piece of fish, it is permitted. There is no need to inquire concerning it.86 [This law applies] even if he does not know him at all; all that he knows is that he is Jewish.
If [the host] has an established reputation for non-observance and for not paying attention to these matters, it is forbidden to accept his hospitality. If one transgresses and accepts his hospitality, it is forbidden to eat meat and drink wine [despite] his assurances unless a person who has an established reputation for observance testifies [to their acceptability].
FOOTNOTES
1.
As explained in Hilchot Avodat Kochavim3:3, pouring a libation and sacrificing are among the four acts of service for which one is liable to any false deity, even if this is not its mode of service.
2.
See the following halachah.
3.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 194) includes this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. According to the Rambam, it is actually the last of the mitzvot which the Torah mentions.
Although the verse does not specifically mention a prohibition, the Rambam derives the prohibition as follows: As stated inHilchot Avodat Kochavim 7:2, we are forbidden to derive benefit from anything offered to a false deity. Since the prooftext quoted establishes an equation between a libation and an offering, we conclude that just as an offering is forbidden by a negative commandment; so, too, there is a negative commandment involving a libation (seeAvodah Zarah 29b).
The Ramban (in his Hasagot to Sefer HaMitzvot) and the Sefer HaChinuch(Mitzvah 111) maintain that both are included in a single prohibition. They should not be counted as separate negative commandments. They all agree, however, that the prohibition against such wine is Scriptural in origin. As the Rambam explains in Sefer HaMitzvot, loc. cit., there are statements of our Sages that appear to imply that the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin. Those statements, however, apply to wine handled by gentiles (see Halachah 3) and not to wine that was actually used for a libation.
4.
This verse is most particularly related to the prohibition against benefiting from the property of a city who were drawn after idol worship (ir hanidachat). Nevertheless, since all false deities can be considered as "condemned," the verse applies to them as well (Megillat Esther, Sefer HaMitzvot, negative commandment 25). The expression "any trace" implies even the slightest amount of benefit is prohibited.
5.
We find an allusion to this decree in Scripture itself for Daniel 1:8 speaks of how Daniel refrained from drinking the king's wine. Avodah Zarah 36b states that the decree against drinking wine handled by gentiles was instituted lest this lead to familiarity and ultimately, to intermarriage. From the Rambam's wording in the following halachah, however, it would appear that the prohibition was instituted as a safeguard against benefiting from idolatry (Ma'aseh Rokeach; see also Halachah 7 and notes).
6.
One fourth of a log, 86 cc. According toShiurei Torah and 150 cc. According toChazon Ish. This is the standard liquid measure involved in ritual matters.
7.
It is forbidden to drink even the slightest amount, but one is liable only for drinking arevi'it (Lechem Mishneh).
8.
See Chapter 12, Halachot 1-2, which define what is meant by a gentile touching wine. As implied by the contrast to the following halachah, for it to be forbidden to benefit from the wine, the gentile must touch it intentionally. Similarly, he must know that it is wine (Radbaz).
9.
Therefore even if there is no false deity present, it is possible that the gentile intended to use it as a libation. See Halachah 7 and notes which discuss which gentiles we are referring to.
10.
See Chapter 12, Halachah 5.
11.
Here the term child is not defined chronologically, but in terms of his relation to idolatry. Does he praise the name of a false deity or not? [Avodah Zarah 57a; Tur,Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:1)].
12.
In both instances, we cannot say that the person had the intent to use the wine as a libation. In the first instance, he did not intend to touch the wine and in the second, the child does not know about idolatrous worship. Nevertheless, the wine is still forbidden as a safeguard. See Chapter 12, Halachah 5. See also the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 124:24) who states that in the present era, most gentiles are not idolaters. Even so, if they touch wine unintentionally, although there are authorities who say there is room for leniency, the prevailing custom is to be stringent unless a significant loss is involved. See Siftei Cohen 124:71.
13.
Thus reaching the intermediate stage of Jewish servants, as Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah12:11 states, they "have departed from the category of gentiles, but have yet to enter the category of Jews."
14.
Their "conversion" to Judaism will prevent them from offering such a libation. See theTur who also mentions the opinion of Rabbenu Chananel who maintains that a gentile servant causes wine to be forbidden for twelve months.
The Tur clarifies that the debate concerns only a servant, because his acceptance of Judaism is forced. All agree that no such strictures apply to a convert who willingly accepts Judaism.
15.
If they were not born in a Jewish domain, the circumcision alone is of no consequence and even minors cause wine to become forbidden to drink (Kessef Mishneh).
16.
If they were not immersed yet, even young children cause wine they touch to become forbidden to drink (the Kessef Mishneh'sinterpretation of the Rambam's opinion). The Rashba, however, differs and maintains even if these children were neither circumcised or immersed, they do not cause wine to be forbidden. The Turei Zahav124:3 and the Siftei Cohen 124:9 differ and maintain that even the Rambam would accept the Rashba's approach.
17.
Here the term child is not defined chronologically, but in terms of his relation to idolatry. Does he praise the name of a false deity or not? [Avodah Zarah 57a; Tur,Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:1)].
18.
I.e., it is permitted entirely, even to drink it.
19.
The prohibitions against the worship of false deities, blasphemy, murder, theft, incest and adultery, eating the flesh of a living animal, and the obligation to establish courts. SeeHilchot Melachim 8:10.
20.
See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 14:7.
21.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that there are two dimensions to the prohibition against drinking the wine of gentiles:
a) The desire to limit familiarity with gentiles, lest it lead to intermarriage. This applies to resident aliens as well. Therefore there is a prohibition against drinking their wine.
b) A safeguard against benefiting from wine used as libations. This does not apply with regard to resident aliens. Therefore there is no prohibition against deriving benefit from their wine.
22.
Since we do not suspect that he will use the wine for a libation - or allow other gentiles to do so - we do not forbid one to leave it there for a short while. Nevertheless, if it is left there for a long time, we fear that the gentile will exchange it with his own wine and as stated above, it is forbidden for Jews to drink his own wine (see Rashi, Avodah Zarah 64b).
23.
The Rambam's wording has attracted the attention of the commentaries, for from the beginning of the halachah, it appears that the gentile must accept all seven mitzvot, while this clause appears to imply that it is sufficient for him to accept only the prohibition against idolatry. The Kessef Mishneh explains that when the entire nation does not worship false deities, then we do not fear that wine will be used as a libation. When, however, that is not the case, a gentile must accept all seven mitzvot for his wine to be permitted.
24.
Our translation follows the standard version of the Mishneh Torah. The uncensored text reads: "Christians, by contrast, are idolaters. It is forbidden to benefit...." The Rama (Orach Chayim 155:1) rules that Christianity violates only the prohibition against shituf, worshipping another entity together with God, and gentiles are not prohibited against such worship. It must be emphasized that today, though many gentiles are nominally Christian, their observance is minimal and they have an awareness of monotheism.
See also the statements of the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 123:1, 124:24) who quotes opinions that maintain that in the present age, it is not customary for gentiles to pour wine as libations to false deities. Nevertheless, the prohibition against drinking such wine, however, remains intact.
25.
For in the Rambam's age, most gentiles were idolaters. The Rabbinic authorities question whether one can make such an assumption in the present age. For many gentiles do not worship according to any religious rites at all and others, like the Arabs, have a conception of monotheism.
26.
Hilchot Issurei Mizbeach 6:9 states that wine that was cooked to the extent that its taste changed is forbidden to be used as a libation on the altar. To put the concept in contemporary terms, wine that was pasteurized is included in this category.
27.
Avodah Zarah 30b relates that the Sage Shmuel actually drank boiled wine together with a gentile.
The Kessef Mishneh quotes Rabbenu Asher who asks: If the decree against wine touched by a gentile was instituted to prevent intermarriage, what difference does it make if it was boiled or not? Will boiling the wine prevent familiarity from arising with gentiles?
In resolution, he explains that perhaps since boiled wine is uncommon, our Sages did not apply their decree in such a situation. Even though today, it has become common to drink boiled - i.e., pasteurized wine - our Sages decree has not been expanded. It must be emphasized that this leniency applies to wine belonging to a Jew that was boiled. Wine belonging to a gentile becomes forbidden before it is boiled and thus cannot be drunken.
28.
Although they are unfit to be used for a libation.
29.
This includes any wine to which sugar was added.
30.
Hilchot Issurei Mizbeach 6:9.
31.
In their days, grape presses were built on an incline, so that after the grapes were pressed, the juice would flow naturally toward a cistern.
32.
The Turei Zahav 123:14 states that some interpret the Rambam as speaking only about a winepress that is open. If it is plugged close, there is room to say that the prohibition does not apply. Nevertheless, theTurei Zahav quotes other views that maintain that the prohibition applies even in such an instance.
33.
Implied is that a libation cannot be offered with one's feet (Kessef Mishneh based onAvodah Zarah 56b; the Siftei Cohen 123:43, however, maintains that this is not the correct understanding of the Rambam's words). The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah124:11), however, rules that a gentile who touches the wine with his feet causes it to be come forbidden. The Rama, however, rules leniently and maintains that the prohibition applies only to drinking such wine.
34.
The Turei Zahav 124:17 interprets this as referring to an instance where he does not touch the wine at all, not even with his feet. The Kessef Mishneh, however, explains that this is referring to a situation where the gentile touches the wine with his feet, but not with his hands.
35.
And watching that the gentile does not touch it.
36.
It is, however, permitted to benefit from it. 36. The fact that it becomes vinegar afterwards does not cause it to become permitted.
The Radbaz states that one can conclude from the Rambam's wording that if a gentile topuches vinegar belonging to a Jew, it is permitted, for it is no longer wine.
38.
Our translation is based on authoritative manuscripts and early printings of theMishneh Torah. The standard published text is difficult to understand. As the Radbaz and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 125:6) state, the Rambam is referring to a situation where a certain amount of grape juice collects in the bottom of the baskets. Even though that juice spatters of the grapes, it does not cause the wine to be considered forbidden, for this prohibition does not apply until the wine begins to flow, as stated in Halachah 11 (Radbaz).
39.
Even to benefit from them [Kessef Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 123:14)]. See also the Rama who states that the prohibition applies only when the peels were in contact with gentile wine. If the gentiles had merely crushed the grapes, but the wine had not begun flowing from the winepress, the peels are not forbidden.
40.
See the Shulchan Aruch (ibid. ) which quotes more stringent views in certain circumstances.
41.
For a certain quantity of wine is absorbed in the container. Afterwards, when the kosher wine is placed in the container, it will be soaked into the container and the wine in the container will be released into it.
42.
See the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah135:16) which explains that even if one used the containers for water during this period, this does not prevent the containers from becoming permitted.
43.
I.e., if they are not covered with tar (Kessef Mishneh). By heating them, one will achieve the results of libbun and purge any absorbed wine through heat.
See also the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah135:15) which state that hagalah, filling the containers with boiling water is also acceptable.
44.
It is, however, permitted to benefit from this wine (Kessef Mishneh).
45.
For these substances nullify the taste of wine (Rashi, Avodah Zarah 33b).
46.
I.e., even though they appear new, we suspect that a gentile used them to store wine. Hence they must be washed. Nevertheless, the fact that they appear new indicates that they were not used for a long time. Hence, washing them is sufficient.
This stringency applies only with regard to containers covered with pitch. Since they are dark black, it is not evident whether they were used previously or not. With regard to other containers, it is much more clearly apparent whether or not they were used. Hence there is no need for this stringency (Kessef Mishneh).
47.
The Kessef Mishneh notes that Avodah Zarah 74b appears to require that such utensils be dried. He questions why the Rambam does not mention this point. As a possible resolution, he suggests that perhaps the Talmud is speaking about utensils belonging to a gentile, while the Rambam is speaking about those belonging to a Jew.
48.
The Rambam's ruling is dependent on his interpretation of Avodah Zarah 33b. Other authorities including Rashi and the Ra'avad have a different understanding of the passage. Their view is cited by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 135:4).
49.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that we are speaking of an instance where the glazing of the lead or the pitch was not completed in a thorough manner and the surface of the utensil is not smooth. Therefore such a utensil will absorb wine more easily than an ordinary earthenware utensil. Hence, three washings are required. The following halachah, by contrast, is speaking about a utensil that is glazed in a more thorough manner, producing a smooth surface. Hence it is less likely to absorb the wine than an ordinary earthenware utensil.
50.
As mentioned above, the Kessef Mishnehinterprets this to mean that they were glazed in a manner that produced a smooth surface. Hence they do not absorb the wine easily.
51.
After being washed alone.
52.
In order to produce a green color, a substance called netar, alum crystals [Rama (Yoreh De'ah 135:5)], is mixed into the glazing. This substance is very absorbent. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah, loc. cit.) states that utensils made from this substance can never be purified.
53.
I.e., the glazing does not cover the entire utensil.
54.
Until the wine is purged as mentioned in Halachah 15.
55.
The Kessef Mishneh quotes the Rashba as stating that from the fact that these statements are made about earthenware utensils, one can conclude that metal utensils do not absorb even when gentile wine was placed in them for an extended period of time. They will absorb only when liquids are heated.
56.
For even if the wine was not placed in them for an extended period, it is possible that there will be a certain amount of residue left in the container.
57.
For over a short period of time, they will not absorb.
58.
That is not covered with pitch (Kessef Mishneh) .
59.
Rashi (Avodah Zarah 74b) and the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 138:1) explain that after pitch is applied to a vat, a small amount of wine is placed in the vat to remove the unfavorable odor of the pitch.
60.
I.e., rubbing the walls with ashes and then washing them (Kessef Mishneh).
61.
Since a larger amount of pitch is necessary, it will absorb more.
62.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 138:1) follows the position of other Rishonim who maintains that even after peeling the outer layer of the pitch, one must apply ashes and water, as stated in the previous halachah.
63.
As stated with regard to barrels in Halachah 15. The Ra'avad and most other Rishonimdiffer with regard to this ruling and require the barrel to be pealed.
64.
Indeed, one would suspect the laws governing barrels to be more stringent, for wine is stored there for long periods. It remains in a winepress, by contrast, for only a short time.
65.
Without having to wait any time at all.
66.
For earthenware absorbs more readily than other substances. In the previous halachah, we assume that the winepress itself did not absorb any wine. In this case, we assume that it did (Kessef Mishneh).
67.
Without peeling off the pitch as stated in the previous halachah. Here also the Ra'avad differs and rules that the pitch must be peeled off. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) follows the Rambam's ruling.
68.
In Halachah 15.
69.
Hair does not absorb liquid at all. Hence, it need only be washed to remove the wine that may be sticking to its surface.
70.
Our translation follows the authoritative manuscripts and early printings of theMishneh Torah. The standard printed text differs slightly.
71.
Which is more absorbant.
72.
So that the residue will not collect there.
73.
Our translation is based on the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 135:8).
74.
When citing this law in his Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 138:7, 9), Rav Yosef Caro does not mention the need to untie the knots in this instance. As evident from his Kessef Mishneh, he follows the approach of the Rashba who maintains that when an object is left for twelve months, there is no need to untie the knots. The Siftei Cohen 138:8 differs and states that the Rambam's ruling should be followed.
75.
Upon which the grapes are placed.
76.
Used to crush the grapes (see the conclusion of the gloss of the Lechem Mishneh to Halachah 17).
77.
Which are used as brooms to collect the grapes (Rashi, Avodah Zarah 75a).
78.
In his Commentary to the Mishneh, Taharot10:8, the Rambam states that this refers to the restraints placed around olives (and grapes) when they are being squeezed to gather them together.
79.
This term refers to the process of applying ashes and water mentioned above.
80.
To purge the wine absorbed in this fashion.
81.
Cooking them in such water will cause whatever wine that was absorbed to be sealed in its place and never to be released.
82.
This will also purge the absorbed wine. SeeHilchot Tumat Ochalin 11:17 which mentions these same processes in a different context.
83.
A Jew who worships false divinities, does not observe the Sabbath, or denies the Torah and its mitzvot is considered equivalent to a gentile and his wine is forbidden just as a gentile's is (see Hilchot Shabbat 30:15). When Eretz Yisrael was populated solely by Jews, our Sages maintained that there was no need to suspect that a person fell into the above categories.
84.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, stating that a common person will not necessarily cause another to transgress. The Radbaz states that even if the common people will not necessarily transgress themselves, they will not be careful about protecting another person's observance and may sell him forbidden articles. This view is cited by the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 119:1).
85.
Chapter 3, Halachah 21; Chapter 8, Halachah 7.
86.
We assume that the host is observant and that he is giving his guest the same food that he eats himself (Radbaz).
Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 12
Halacha 1
How do we define the term touch when we say that a gentile1 who touches wine causes it to be forbidden? Touching the wine itself whether with his hands2 or with any of his other limbs with which it is customary to pour a libation3 and shook the wine.4
If, however, he extended his hand to a barrel and his hand was grabbed before he could remove [any wine] or shake it, [there is room for leniency]. If the barrel was opened from below and the wine was allowed to flow out to the extent that it reached below his hand, the wine is not forbidden.5
Halacha 2
Halacha 3
When a gentile was holding a container on the ground and a Jew poured wine into it, the wine is permitted.11 If the gentile shakes the container, the wine becomes forbidden.
Halacha 4
It is permitted to have a gentile move a closed [container of wine] from one place to another even though the wine moves. For this is not the manner in which a libation is made.12
Halacha 5
Halacha 6
If wine moves because of a gentile's power although he did not intend to do so, since he did not touch the wine, it is permitted to drink it.22 What is implied? If he lifted up a container of wine and poured it into another container while thinking that it was beer or oil, [the wine] is permitted.
Halacha 7
If a gentile entered a house or a store seeking wine and extended his hand to search for it and touched wine,23 [the wine] is forbidden. [The rationale is that] he was intending [to touch] wine. This is not considered as touching without intent.
Halacha 8
When a barrel is split lengthwise and a gentile comes and embraces it so that the halves will not separate24 it is permitted to benefit from [the wine].25 If, however, it split widthwise and he grabbed the upper half so that it will not fall, it is permitted to drink [the wine]. For the wine is not affected by the gentile's power.
Halacha 9
When a gentile fell into a cistern of wine and was hoisted up dead,26measured a cistern containing wine with a reed, swatted away a fly or a hornet from it with a reed,27 patted a boiling bottle of wine so that the boiling would cease28or took a barrel and threw it into the cistern in anger,29it is merely permitted to benefit from the wine. If, [in the first instance,] the gentile was raised [from the cistern] alive, it is forbidden to benefit from the wine.30
Halacha 10
When there is a hole on the side of a barrel, the stopper slips away from the hole, and a gentile places his finger over the hole so that the wine will not flow out, all of the wine from the top of the barrel until the hole is forbidden.31 It is, however, permitted to drink the wine beneath the hole.32
Halacha 11
[The following rules apply when] one end of a bent outflow pipe made from metal, glass, or the like is placed in wine and the other end extends out of the barrel. If one sucked on the wine and the wine began flowing out as is always done, and a gentile came and place his finger at the end of the outflow pipe and prevent the wine from flowing outward, all of the wine in the barrel is forbidden.33 [The rationale is that] were it not for his hand, everything [in the barrel] would have flowed out. Thus all the wine is affected by his power.
Halacha 12
When a person pours wine into a receptacle containing gentile wine, all of the wine in the upper container is forbidden.34 [The rationale is that] the column of wine being poured connects35 between the wine in the upper container and the wine in the lower container. Therefore when a person is measuring wine for a gentile into a container in the latter's hands, he should interrupt [the column of wine before it reaches the utensil] or throw the wine so that [the column of wine] being poured will not establish a connection and cause the wine remaining in the upper container to become forbidden.
Halacha 13
Halacha 14
[The following rules apply with regard to] a container possessed by a Jew that has two "nostrils,"40 that emerge from it, like containers that are used to wash hands, and is filled with wine. If a Jew is sucking and drinking from one nostril and a gentile is sucking and drinking from the other nostril, this is permitted,41provided the Jew begins [drinking] and concludes while the gentile is still drinking. When the gentile stops drinking, all the wine that was in the nostril will return to the container and cause all the wine in it to be forbidden. [The rationale is that] the wine [in the nostril] was moved by [the gentile's] power.42
Halacha 15
When a gentile sucks wine from a container with an outflow pipe, all the wine in the container becomes forbidden.43 For when he ceases [sucking], all of the wine that entered the outflow pipe through his sucking will return to the barrel and cause it to become forbidden.
Halacha 16
When a gentile is transferring barrels of wine from one place to another together with a Jew and [the Jew] is walking after them to protect them, they are permitted even if he separates from him for a mil.44 [The rationale is] that he is afraid of him and will say: "He will suddenly appear before us and observe us."
[More stringent rules apply if the Jew] tells [gentile porters]: "Proceed and I will follow after you."45 If they pass beyond his sight to the extent that [they have time] to uncover the opening of the barrel, seal it again, and [allow it] to dry out,46 it is forbidden to drink all of the wine.47 If for a lesser [time], [the wine] is permitted.48
Halacha 17
Similarly, if a Jew leaves a gentile in his store, even though he departs and enters, [going back and forth] the entire day, the wine is permitted.49 If he informs him that he is departing for a significant period, should he wait long enough [to enable the gentile] to open the barrel, seal it again, and [allow it] to dry out, it is forbidden to drink the wine.50
Similarly, if a person left his wine in a wagon or a ship51 with a gentile and enters a city to tend to his needs, the wine is permitted.52 If he informs him that he is departing for a significant period, should he wait long enough [to enable the gentile] to open the barrel, seal it again, and [allow it] to dry out, it is forbidden to drink the wine.
Halacha 18
Halacha 19
When [a Jew] was drinking together with a gentile and he heard the sound of prayer in the synagogue and departed, even the open wine is permitted. For the gentile will say: "Soon he will remember the wine, come hurriedly and see me touching his wine." Therefore [we do not suspect that] the gentile will move from his place. Hence only the wine that is before him57 becomes forbidden.58
Halacha 20
[The following rules apply when] a gentile and a Jew are living together in one courtyard59 and they both left in agitation60 to see a bridegroom or a funeral. If the gentile returns and closes the entrance and the Jew comes later, the open wine in the Jew's home remains permitted. [We assume that] the gentile closed [the entrance] with the assumption that the Jew had already entered his home and no one remained outside; [i.e.,] he thought that the Jew came before him.
Halacha 21
[The following rules apply when] wine belonging to both a Jew and a gentile [is being stored] in one building and [the Jew's] barrels were open. If the gentile entered the building and locked the door behind him,61 all the wine is forbidden.62 If there is a window in the door that enables a person standing behind the door to see in front of him, all of the barrels that are opposite the window are permitted. Those on the sides are forbidden. [The leniency is granted,] because the gentile will fear from those who can see him.
Halacha 22
Similarly, if a lion roared or the like and the gentile fled and hid among the open barrels, the wine is permitted. For he will say, "Perhaps another Jew also hid here and will see me if I touch [the wine]."
Halacha 23
[The following laws apply with regard to] a wine cellar whose barrels were open, a gentile also stored wine in that inn,63 and the gentile was discovered standing among the open barrels belonging to the Jew. If he was frightened when discovered and it would be considered as if he was a thief,64 it is permitted to drink the wine. For because of his fear and dread, he will not have the opportunity to pour a libation. If he would not be considered as a thief, but instead, he feels secure there, the wine is forbidden.65
When a [gentile] baby is discovered among the barrels, regardless of whether he would be considered like a thief or not, all of the wine is permitted.66
Halacha 24
When a battalion [of soldiers] enter a country with an approach of peace, all of the open barrels [of wine] in the stores are forbidden.67 The closed ones, by contrast, are permitted.68 At a time of war, however, if a battalion spread through a city and moved on, both are permitted,69 because they do not have time to make libations.
Halacha 25
[The following laws apply when] a gentile is discovered standing next to a cistern of wine [belonging to a Jew]. If [the Jew] owes him a debt for which this wine serves is collateral, [the wine] is forbidden.70 Since he feels privileged, he will extend his hand and make a libation. If it is not collateral for a debt, it is permitted to drink the wine.71
Halacha 26
When a gentile harlot is present at a Jewish feast, the wine is permitted. For she is in dread of them and will not touch [the wine].72 When, however, a Jewish harlot is present at a gentile feast, her wine73 that is before her in her utensils is forbidden, for [the gentiles] will touch it without her consent.74
Halacha 27
[The following lays apply when] a gentile is discovered in a winepress:75 If there is enough moisture from wine that when one places his hand in it, [the hand] will become moist to the extent that if it touches his other hand, that hand will become moist,76 it is necessary to wash out the winepress thoroughly and dry it out.77 If this amount is not present, all that is necessary is to wash it out thoroughly. This is an extra measure of stringency.78
Halacha 28
[The following rules apply with regard to] a barrel floating in the river. If it was found near a city populated primarily by Jews, we are permitted to benefit from it.79 Near a city populated primarily by gentiles, it is forbidden.
Halacha 29
In a place where most of the wine merchants are Jewish, if one discovers large containers that are generally used only by wine merchants to store wine and which are filled with wine, it is permitted to benefit from [the wine].80
When a barrel has been opened by thieves, if most of the local thieves are Jewish, it is permitted to drink the wine. If not, it is forbidden.
FOOTNOTES
1.
As the Rambam stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 8, unless otherwise specified, when he uses the term "gentile," he is referring to an idolater.
2.
Or with an article held in his hand [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:11)].
3.
As evident from Chapter 11, Halachah 11, according to the Rambam, it is not customary to pour a libation with one's feet. Note, however, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:11) which forbids wine that a gentile touched with his feet. The Rama, however, quotes the Rambam's view.
4.
If, however, he did not cause the wine to move, it is forbidden to drink it, but one is allowed to benefit from it (Radbaz). In hisKessef Mishneh, however, Rav Yosef Caro notes that although there are authorities who agree with the ruling of the Radbaz, from the Rambam's wording, it appears that the wine is permitted entirely. In his Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 124:13), he follows the majority view and rules that it is permitted only to benefit from such wine.
5.
The Rambam is citing an incident that transpired as recorded by Avodah Zarah59b. It is not forbidden to benefit from the wine. The question of whether or not it is forbidden to drink it depends on the difference of opinion mentioned in the previous note.
6.
With regard to a closed container, see Halachah 4.
7.
The Ra'avad objects to this ruling, maintaining that as long as the gentile does not touch the wine itself, lift the container, or cause the wine to spatter, moving an open utensil does not cause it to be forbidden. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:17) quotes the Rambam's ruling as a minority opinion and the Rama states that it need not be followed if financial loss is involved.
8.
This addition is made on the basis of the gloss of the Radbaz.
9.
There is a difference of opinion among the commentaries if only the wine that is poured out is forbidden or also the wine which remains in the container (Kessef Mishneh). The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 125:1) quotes the more stringent view. The Rama mentions the more lenient opinion, but states that it may be followed only in a case of severe loss.
10.
I.e., even to drink the wine. For merely lifting up the wine is of no consequence.
11.
One may even drink it [Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 125:8)].
12.
A libation is made only from an open container (see Avodah Zarah 60a).
13.
This addition was made on the basis of the gloss of the Radbaz.
14.
For this is equivalent to closing it.
15.
The Rambam's source (Avodah Zarah 60a) and also the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah125:10) emphasize that we are referring to a situation where the Jew is following the gentile. Otherwise, the wine is certainly forbidden.
16.
The Radbaz states that the same laws apply regardless of what the container was made of. Therefore he maintains that the word "earthenware" is a printer's error.
17.
Although the Rashba maintains that one may benefit from the wine, most authorities rule that it is prohibited to benefit from it as well as to drink it [Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)].
18.
Since the container is both open and full, it is highly likely that the gentile touched the wine (Avodah Zarah 60a).
19.
For shaking the wine is equivalent to pouring it as a libation, as stated in Halachah 1.
20.
I.e., it is forbidden to drink it, as stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 5.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 124:24) states that in the present era, most gentiles are not idolaters. Therefore, if they touch wine unintentionally, the wine is not forbidden at all.
21.
This addition was made on the basis of the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh.
22.
According to Scriptural Law, as long as the gentile does not touch the wine, it is not forbidden. Although our Sages forbade wine which he shook without touching as a safeguard, that applies only when the gentile intentionally touches the container of the wine (see Avodah Zarah 58a).
23.
Shaking it (Kessef Mishneh). According to the Rambam, this applies even though he did not know for certain that the article he touched was wine. The Ra'avad differs and maintains that the gentile must know that the container contains wine when shaking it. Otherwise, it is not forbidden. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:12) quotes the Rambam's ruling.
24.
And thus the wine will not spill.
25.
See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:22).
26.
In this instance, it is permitted to benefit from the wine, because the gentile is considered to have touched it without intending to. See Halachah 5. According to the Rama's view that the gentiles of the present age are not considered as idolaters, there is no prohibition against using such wine at all. This leniency should be accepted if a significant loss is involved (Siftei Cohen124:55). This concept also applies to the remainder of the instances mentioned in this halachah.
27.
In these instances, since the gentile did not touch the wine directly, merely by means of another entity, it is not forbidden to benefit from it.
28.
Rashi, Avodah Zarah 60a, states that it is not forbidden to benefit from this wine, because this is not the ordinary way that one makes a libation. Kin'at Eliyahu asks: Since the wine is boiling, the entire prohibition against gentile wine seemingly should not apply, as stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 9?
29.
In this instance also, the gentile did not touch the wine directly. Hence it is permitted to benefit from it.
The Ra'avad protests to this ruling, stating that if he threw the barrel into the cistern in anger, the wine in the cistern is not forbidden at all. Even if he intentionally threw the barrel into the cistern, it is still permitted to benefit from the wine for the reason mentioned. The Radbaz notes that the wording of Avodah Zarah, loc. cit., appears to support the Ra'avad's perspective, for it states that our Sages hikshiru, "considered acceptable," the wine. He, however, cites a passage from the Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zarah 4:11) which appears to fit the Rambam's perspective. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:19) quotes the Rambam's view. Nevertheless, the commentaries note that inYoreh De'ah 125:5, the Shulchan Aruch, appears to support the Ra'avad's view.
30.
For we assume that in his happiness over being saved, he will offer the wine as a libation to his false deity (Avodah Zarah, loc. cit.). The Turei Zahav 124:19 states that if the gentile was alive when taken from the cistern, the wine is forbidden even if he dies immediately afterwards.
31.
One may not even benefit from it. Since the wine would have flowed out had the gentile not place his finger there, our Sages considered it as if he touched all of that wine.
32.
Because this wine was not affected by the gentile's touch at all. Although this wine is touching the wine that is forbidden, it is not forbidden. The Ra'avad objects to such a ruling, maintaining that the entire barrel should be considered as mixed together. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh justify the Rambam's ruling, explaining that had the gentile inserted his finger in the hole and touched the wine, the entire barrel would have been forbidden. Here, however, we are speaking about an instance where the gentile stopped the wine from flowing by placing his finger on the outside. Therefore the wine above the hole is forbidden because it was affected by his power, as stated in the following halachah. This is merely a Rabbinic decree. Hence, the wine below the hole is not forbidden at all. The Turand the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah124:23) follow the Ra'avad's view. See alsoHilchot Tum'at Ochalin 8:6.
33.
This ruling applies when the opening to the outflow pipe is placed at the bottom of the barrel, so that all the wine would actually have flowed out had the gentile allowed it to. If it was not placed at the bottom of the barrel, the laws mentioned in the previous halachah apply (Radbaz; Siftei Cohen124:69).
34.
From the Rambam's wording, it appears that this ruling applies with regard to all gentile wine, even when it was not known to have been used as a libation for a false deity. The Rambam, moreover, appears to forbid benefit from the wine, not only partaking of it. The Ra'avad rules that it is permitted to benefit from the wine, but not to partake of it. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 126) mentions the opinion of Rabbbenu Tam which is more lenient, ruling that this stringency does not apply to ordinary gentile wine. He rules that it is even permitted to partake of the wine. TheShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 126:1-2) follows the ruling of the Maharam of Rutenburg, who states the Rambam's stringency should be followed only when a small loss is involved. If there is a significant loss involved, we may rely on the perspective of Rabbenu Tam.
See also the Tur who mentions a perspective that maintains that the above stringency applies only to wine used as a libation for a false deity, but not to ordinary gentile wine.
35.
Compare to Hilchot Tumat Ochalin 7:1,5 where this principle is not applied. It appears that it is applied in this instance because of the stringency of the prohibition against gentile wine.
36.
Because the wine held back in the funnel is forbidden because of the connection to the column of wine that extends to the gentile's utensil.
37.
Drying refers to the process of applying water and ashes mentioned in Chapter 11, Halachah 20.
38.
The Kessef Mishneh offers the following interpretation of the Rambam's wording: As long as the funnel was washed thoroughly, even if it was not dried out, it does not cause other wine to become forbidden. He also, however, makes a distinction between a funnel that has been used by a gentile frequently and one that was used just once. In the former instance, he states, it is possible that washing it thoroughly alone is not sufficient.
39.
I.e., it is forbidden to benefit from the entire quantity of wine [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 124:11)]. According to the Rama, one is permitted to benefit from the wine if the loss will be significant (Siftei Cohen 124:23).
The rationale for the prohibition is that the wine in the container will mix with the small quantity of gentile wine in the funnel and become forbidden.
40.
I.e., outflow pipes.
41.
Since the wine which the Jew is drinking and that which the gentile is drinking are flowing in opposite directions, they are not considered to be connected.
42.
For it was his sucking that drew it into the outflow pipe. When that wine returns to the container and becomes mixed with the wine in the container, all the wine becomes forbidden as indicated by the following halachah.
43.
Even if the wine never touched his mouth (Kessef Mishneh).
44.
A Talmudic measure equivalent to approximately a kilometer. The Lechem Mishneh notes that as stated in Hilchot Mitamei Moshav UMerkav 13:5, a mil is not a cut off point. As long as the gentile has reason to fear that the Jew will appear suddenly, the wine is permitted.
45.
These words will imply to the porters that he will not be coming immediately. Hence there is reason to fear that they will take from the wine.
46.
I.e., so that it would not be apparent that they touched it.
47.
Implied is that one is permitted to benefit from it. The rationale is that since the barrel is sealed, we follow the principle stated in Chapter 13, Halachah 9. See also the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 129:1) who rules that if the loss is significant, we may rely on the views that one seal is sufficient.
48.
I.e., one may even partake of it.
49.
One may drink it. For the gentile will be afraid to touch the wine, for he will never feel that the Jew has left him alone with the opportunity to do whatever he wants.
50.
As in the previous halachah, since the gentile knows that the Jew is departing for a significant period, we fear that he will use the opportunity to take the wine.
51.
See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Avodah Zarah 5:4) which explains why it is necessary to mention all three instances: the store, the wagon, and the ship.
52.
The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 129:1) state that this applies only when the Jew went on a side path that would enable him to surprise the gentile. If, however, he follows the ordinary path, the wine is forbidden. For the gentile will watch to see whether he is coming.
53.
And thus: a) the wine is easily accessible, and b) the barrel does not have to be sealed close to hide the fact that one took from the wine.
54.
It would appear that according to the Rambam, it is even forbidden to benefit from the wine (Kessef Mishneh).
55.
We assume that he will touch the wine on the table, because it is open before him. But we don't think that he will take the risk of appearing as a thief by touching the wine on the counter. For it is not proper for a guest to take food left on the counter until the host has it brought to the table [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Avodah Zarah5:5)].
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 129:7) rules slightly more stringently, stating that any wine which is in the gentile's reach is forbidden.
56.
Since the Jew gave him license, we have no reason to think that he will restrain himself. Here, too, the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) rules more stringently, stating that if the Jew remains outside for a prolonged period (as mentioned in the previous halachah), even the closed barrels are forbidden.
57.
I.e., the wine on the table, as in the previous halachah (Kessef Mishneh).
58.
As above, when quoting this law, theShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 129:7) mentions the possibility of the Jew coming from a side path and surprising the gentile. If this is not possible, that source does not accept this leniency.
59.
Avodah Zarah 70a (the Rambam's source) and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah129:9) state that this leniency applies when the Jew and the gentile live in a two-storey home, with the Jew living in the upper storey. The Rambam does not appear to think that is necessary (Kessef Mishneh).
60.
The Kessef Mishneh states that the Rambam chose his words carefully. This leniency is granted because they left in agitation. Hence, it was probable that they would not notice each other outside. If, however, they left with calm reserve, it is possible that the gentile would have looked to see that the Jew was not returning and then entered his home and touched his wine.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 129:9) quotes this understanding as halachah. The Turei Zahav 129:19, however, differs, explaining that even when a person leaves his home in an agitated state, he will not necessarily return in an agitated state.
61.
If, however, we do not know that the door was locked - even though it was closed and it has a lock - the wine is permitted (Turei Zahav 128:5).
62.
If, however, the Jew's barrels were closed, the wine in the closed barrels is permitted unless the gentile remained in the closed building alone for the time it would take to open a barrel, seal it closed again, and for its lid to dry, as stated in Halachah 16 [Kessef Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah128:3)].
63.
I.e., in an inn, there were several wine cellars, one in which a Jew stored wine and one in which a gentile stored wine (Kessef Mishneh).
64.
I.e., if he was brought before the judges of a city on the complaint that he touched the wine, the judges would consider him a thief [Rashi (Avodah Zarah 61b)]. The Kessef Mishneh states that it is possible that the Rambam interprets the term differently, understanding it as meaning "if he would think he would be considered a thief." According to this interpretation, it could refer not only to the gentile's touching the wine, but also entering the wine cellar.
To explain: Since the gentile also stores wine in that inn, he has permission to be in the inn, but he does not necessarily have permission to be in the Jew's wine cellar. This is precisely the question the Rambam is focusing on. Would the gentile be considered as a thief for being found in the Jew's wine cellar or not?
65.
Since he feels unthreatened, there is a high likelihood that he touched the Jews' wine.
66.
For a baby never pours wine as a libation. In Chapter 11, Halachah 5, the Rambam states that it is forbidden to drink wine touched by a gentile baby. Here, he permits the wine entirely, because we are not certain that the baby in fact touched the wine. The Radbaz explains the rationale for the Rambam's ruling.: Since the baby does not think of using the wine as a libation, there is no reason for it to trouble itself and touch it.
67.
The Rambam's wording appears to imply that the open barrels in the homes are permitted. The soldiers would take the liberty of entering stores and making themselves free with their contents. They would not, however, feel that confident to enter homes. The Radbaz objects to this interpretation, noting that we see that soldiers often enter homes to loot. Indeed, when mentioning this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah129:12) speaks of homes and not stores.
Compare also to Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 18:26 which discusses a similar situation with regard to the question whether the women of the town have been raped.
68.
We can be certain that had the soldiers open the wine for use as a libation, they would not have taken the trouble of closing them again [Kessef Mishneh, Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)].
69.
The Kessef Mishneh states that if a barrel was closed and it is discovered open, it is forbidden. For we see that the soldiers did have time to touch the wine.
70.
The Kessef Mishneh explains the Rambam's ruling as follows: If the wine is security for a debt owed the gentile, the gentile will certainly not be considered a thief for touching the wine. Therefore it is forbidden. If the wine is not considered as security for a loan, when the gentile would be considered as a thief, the wine is permitted. When he would not be considered as a thief, it is forbidden.
71.
This applies even if the Jew owes him money, and the loan is due, but he has not designated the wine as security for the debt [Rashi (Avodah Zarah 60a); Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 128:2)].
72.
Although the Jews are willing to give in to their lust for forbidden relations, they are not suspect to drink gentile wine (Avodah Zarah69b). Even the gentile harlot realizes this.
73.
I.e., wine that she herself brought.
74.
Since they are employing her as a harlot, they look down upon her and show no consideration for her religious obligations.
75.
I.e., a winepress that does not contain any wine, except for some remnants on the floor.
76.
This is the meaning of the Hebrew phrasetofach al minat litfiach.
77.
Applying water and ashes, as stated in Chapter 11, Halachah 20.
78.
We are not certain that the gentile try to touch the wine. Even if he did try to touch the wine, there is no reason for a prohibition, for we are speaking of a dry winepress. Hence washing it out is certainly sufficient (Radbaz).
79.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 129:17) quotes this law as applying only in situations when there are obstructions in the river that prevent wine from being carried down the river from other places. In such a situation, we follow the principle of rov, i.e., since the majority of the city's inhabitants are Jewish, we assume that the barrel came from one of them. We are, nevertheless, forbidden to drink the wine. See the notes to the following halachah.
80.
In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro questions the Rambam's ruling. The Rambam's logic appears to be that since it is obvious that the wine came from a wine merchant and most of the wine merchants are Jewish, we follow the majority and rule that the wine is permitted. Nevertheless, since the majority of the inhabitants of the town are gentile, we forbid drinking the wine. The Kessef Mishneh asks: "If we fear that the gentile touched the wine, it should be forbidden to benefit from it as well. And if not, it should be permitted to drink it." Indeed, he proposes that perhaps the Rambam's intent is that it is permitted to benefit only from the barrels. In his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah129:19), he follows the Rambam's ruling. Based on his Beis Yosef, it is possible to explain that we are speaking about closed barrels. We assume that had a gentile opened them and touched the wine, he would not have closed them again. Alternatively, since we do not know for certain that the gentile touched the wine, we do not forbid benefiting from it.
Ma'achalot Assurot - Chapter 13
Halacha 1
[The following rules apply when a Jew] purchases or rents a building in a courtyard belonging to a gentile and fills it with wine. If the Jew lives in that courtyard, the wine is permitted even if the entrance is open. [The rationale is that] the gentile will always worry, saying: "He may suddenly enter his building and find me there." If the Jew lives in another courtyard,1 he should not depart until he closes the building and keeps the key and the seal2 in his possession. He need not fear that the gentile will make a copy of the key to the building.
Halacha 2
When [the Jew] left [the building] without closing the entrance or closed it and gave the key to the gentile, it is forbidden to drink the wine. Perhaps the gentile entered and poured a libation, for the Jew is not present there.3
If [the Jew] told [the gentile]: "Hold the key for me until I come," the wine is permitted. He did not entrust him with guarding the house, only with guarding the key.4
Halacha 3
[The following laws apply when] a gentile hires a Jew to prepare wine for him in a state of ritual purity5 so that it will be permitted to the Jews and they will purchase it from wine. The wine is [stored] in a building belonging to the gentile. If the Jew who is guarding the wine lives in that courtyard, the wine is permitted. [This applies] even if the entrance is open and the [Jewish] guard goes out and returns.6
If the guard lives in another courtyard,7 the wine is forbidden even though the key and the seal are in the possession of a Jew. [The rationale is that] since the wine belongs to the gentile and is found in his domain, he does not fear falsifying [the seal and/or key] and to enter the building. He will say: "What could be? If they find out about this, they will not purchase [the wine] from me."8
Halacha 4
Even if a gentile wrote [a legal document] for the Jew stating that he received the money for which he agreed to sell him the wine,9 since the Jew cannot remove the wine from the gentile's domain until he pays him the money, the wine belongs to the gentile and it is forbidden unless the guard lives in the courtyard.
The guard does not have to sit and guard [the wine] at all times. Instead, he may come in and go out, as explained. [This applies whether the wine is stored] in the domain belonging to the owner of the wine or in a domain belonging to another gentile.
Halacha 5
When the pure wine belonging to a gentile was placed in the public domain or in a building that is open to the public domain and there are Jews going back and forth, it is permitted.10 For it has not entered the gentile's domain.
Halacha 6
[When wine is located] in a garbage dump, a window, or under a palm tree even if it does not have fruit, it is as [if it is located in] the public domain.11When a gentile is located near wine located in such a place, it is not forbidden. A house which is open to such a place is considered as if it as open to the public domain.
Halacha 7
[The following rule applies when] there is a courtyard divided by low barriers,12 on one side there is a gentile and on the other, a Jew, there are two roofs, with the Jew's roof located above the gentile's roof, or [the two roofs are located] side by side, but there are dividers separating them. Even though the gentile can reach the Jew's portion, he need not worry about [the gentile pouring] his wine as a libation13 or [disqualifying] articles that are ritually pure.14
Halacha 8
It is permitted for a Jew to entrust his wine to a gentile for safekeeping in a closed container, provided it has two distinguishing marks. This is referred to as "a seal within a seal."15
What is implied? [A Jew] closed a barrel with a utensil that is not tightly fitting as most people do and then sealed it with clay, it is considered as one seal. If the container is tightly fitting and he applied clay to it from above, it is considered as "a seal within a seal."
Similarly, if one tied the opening to a wineskin close, it is considered as one seal. If he turned the opening to the wineskin inside and then tied it close, it is considered as "a seal within a seal." Similarly, any deviation from the ordinary pattern people follow is considered as one seal and applying clay or tying it is a second seal.16
Halacha 9
If [a Jew] entrusted [wine that was closed] with one seal to a gentile for safekeeping, it is forbidden to drink it, but it is permitted to benefit from it provided he designates a [specific] corner for it.17
Halacha 10
Two seals are not necessary when one deposits boiled wine, beer, wine which is mixed with other substances, e.g., honey or oil,18 vinegar, cheese, and any substance that is forbidden only according to Rabbinic Law with a gentile. Instead, one seal is sufficient.19 Nevertheless, two seals are necessary for wine, meat, and pieces of fish that do not have signs and which were entrusted to a gentile.20
Halacha 11
It appears to me that anywhere in this context that we have stated that our wine is forbidden to be drunk, but it is permitted to benefit from it because of the possibility that a gentile touched it, we are speaking about an instance where the gentile is an idolater. If, however, the prohibition has arisen because of a gentile who is not an idolater, e.g., an Arab,21 who touched our wine unintentionally or tapped the top of a barrel,22 [the wine] is permitted to be drunken. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Halacha 12
When, however, one deposits wine in the domain of a resident alien23 sends wine with him and departs for an extended period, or leaves one's home open in a courtyard that [one shares with] a resident alien, it is forbidden to drink the wine. For it appears to me that the suspicions that a gentile will exchange [wine] and forge [a seal] apply equally to all gentiles. Since the wine enters their domain,24 it is forbidden at least to drink it.25
Halacha 13
There are situations where the prohibition against wine poured as a libation does not apply at all, yet our Sages forbade them as a safeguard against libation. They are: a gentile should not mix water into wine in a Jew's possession lest he come to pour wine into water. A gentile should not bring grapes to the winepress lest he come to press them or touch the wine. He should not help a Jew when he pours wine from one container to another lest he leave the wine in the possession of the gentile and the wine [flow] because of [the gentile's] power. If the gentile assists [the Jew], mixes water [into wine] or brings grapes, [the wine] is permitted.26
Halacha 14
Halacha 15
We already explained,30 that whenever it is forbidden to benefit from a substance, if one transgresses and sells it, it is permitted [to make use of] the money with the exception of false deities, their accessories, offerings made to them, and wine poured as a libation to it. Our Sages were stringent with regard ordinary gentile wine [and ruled that] money given for it is forbidden like money given for wined poured as a libation to a false deity.
Accordingly, when a gentile hires a Jew to work with him with wine, his wages are forbidden.31
Halacha 16
Halacha 17
If a gentile rented a donkey to ride and placed containers of wine on it, the rental fee for the donkey is permitted.35 If [a gentile] hires a Jew to break barrels of wine used as a libation, his fee is permitted. May he be blessed because he eliminated obscenity.
Halacha 18
When a person hires a worker and tells him: "Transport 100 barrels of beer for me for 100 p'rutot," and it is discovered that one of them is [gentile] wine, his entire wage is forbidden.36
Halacha 19
If he told him: "Transport barrels for me at a p'rutah each," and he transported them and barrels of wine were discovered among them, the wage for the barrels of wine is forbidden. The remainder of the wage is permitted.37
Halacha 20
Halacha 21
When a gentile owed a Jew a maneh,40 it is permitted for the gentile to sell a false deity and wine that had been poured as a libation and bring him the money. If, before he sells them, he tells [the Jew]: "Wait until I sell the false deity or libation wine that I own and [then] I will bring you [the money]," if he sells it and brings [the money] to him, [the money] is forbidden. [This applies] even with regard to ordinary gentile wine. [The rationale is that] the Jew desires that [the false deity or the wine] to continue to exist so that he will be able to pay him his debt.41
Halacha 22
Similarly, when a convert and a gentile were partners and they came to divide the resources [of the partnership], the convert may not tell the gentile: "You take the false deity and I will take the money. You take the wine and I will take the produce." [The rationale is that] he desires that [the forbidden entities] continue to exist so that he will be able to receive something in exchange for them.42
When, by contrast, a convert and a gentile inherit the estate of their father who was a gentile, [the convert] may tell [the gentile]: "You take the false deity and I will take the money. You take the wine and I will take the oil." This is a leniency granted with regard to an estate inherited by a convert so that he will not return to his deviant ways.43 If [the forbidden entities] entered the domain of the convert, it is forbidden.44
Halacha 23
[The following rules apply when] a Jew sells his wine to a gentile. If he established a price before he measured out [the wine], the money is permitted. [The rationale is that] from the time a price was established, [the gentile] definitely agreed [to the purchase] and when he pulled [the wine] into his domain, he acquired it.45 And it does not become [comparable to] wine offered as a libation until he touches it. Therefore at the time of sale, it was permitted.
If he measured it out for him before he established a price, the money is forbidden. [The rationale is that the gentile] did not definitely agree [to the purchase], even though he pulled [the wine] into his domain.46 Thus at the time he touched [the wine], he had not definitely agreed to the purchase. Hence the wine becomes forbidden because of his touch and it is as if [the Jew] is selling gentile wine.
Halacha 24
When does the above apply? When the Jew measured [the wine] into his own containers. If, however, he measured it into the gentile's containers or to a container belonging to a Jew in the gentile's possession, he must take the money,47 before measuring out [the wine]. If he measured out [the wine,] but did not take the money, the money is forbidden even though he established a price. As soon as [the wine] enters [the gentile's] container, it is forbidden as ordinary gentile wine.48
Halacha 25
When [a Jewish employer] gives a dinar to a gentile storekeeper and tells his gentile employee: "Go, drink, and eat [on my account] from the storekeeper and I will settle the accounts with him," he must show concern lest [the employee] will drink wine.49 Thus it will be as if he purchased wine used as a libation and gave it to him.
A similar arrangement with regard to the Sabbatical year50 is also forbidden; i.e., one gives a dinar to a Jewish storekeeper who is a common person and tells his Jewish employee: "Go, drink, and eat [on my account] from the storekeeper and I will settle the accounts with him." If the worker eats food that was not tithed, it is forbidden.51
Halacha 26
If, however, he told them: "Eat and drink the worth of this dinar," or "Eat and drink from the storekeeper on my account and I will pay him," this is permitted. Although the Jew becomes liable, his liability is not specifically related [to the foods from which the employees partake].52 [Therefore,] he need not be concerned, not about wine used as a libation, not about produce of the Sabbatical year, nor about untithed produce.53
Halacha 27
[The following rules apply when] a [gentile] king distributes his wine among the people and takes money for it, as he desires.54 A [Jew] may not tell a gentile: "Take 200 zuz and go into the king's storehouse in place of me," so that the gentile will take the wine designated for the Jew and give the money to the king.55 He may, however, tell him: "Here is 200 zuz for you. Save me from [going to] the storehouse."56
Halacha 28
When a gentile touches57 a Jew's wine against [the Jew's] will,58 it is permitted to sell that wine to that gentile alone.59 [The rationale is] since that gentile wished to cause a Jew a loss [by] having his wine forbidden, it is as if he destroyed it or burnt it, in which instance, he would be obligated to pay. Thus the money [the Jew] takes from him is money for the loss and not money for a sale.60
FOOTNOTES
1.
And thus it is less likely for him to come at frequent intervals.
2.
Implied is that the entrance is closed with two seals, as required by Halachah 8. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 130:2) writes that since in the present age, most gentiles are not idolaters, only one seal is necessary. TheSiftei Cohen 130:11) states that this principle should be applied in the present instance.
3.
Nevertheless, since we do not know for certain that the gentile touched the wine, we do not forbid benefiting from it (Radbaz).
4.
Since the gentile was not given permission to enter the house, he would be considered as a thief if he did so. Hence, we assume that he did not enter the home to pour a libation.
The Ra'avad states that the Rambam's words apply only when the house belongs to the Jew. When, however, the house belongs to the gentile, the wine is forbidden, even if he did not entrust him with the key. The rationale is that since the gentile has a connection to the house, he will have an excuse to enter it. Hence we fear that he entered it and touched the Jew's wine. The Radbaz defends the Rambam's ruling explaining that since the house is rented the owner does not have the right to enter it at will. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah129:5) quotes the Rambam's ruling.
5.
We have translated the Rambam's words literally. The intent, however, appears to be not ritual purity per se, but "without contact with gentiles."
6.
I.e., he is not present at all times. Nevertheless, it is possible that he will return at any given moment. Hence, the gentile will not take liberties. See Halachah 4.
7.
Since he does not live on the premises, he is not considered as a permanent watchman. Hence, the fact that he enters from time to time during the day is not significant (Lechem Mishneh). The Ra'avad differs and maintains that as long as the Jew enters and leaves at will, that is sufficient to inhibit the gentile from touching the wine. [Significantly, in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Avodah Zarah 4:11), the Rambam adopts a position similar to that of the Ra'avad.]
The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 131:1 adopt an intermediate position, stating that if there is another Jew living in that city and the entrance to the building where the wine is stored is visible from the public domain, the wine is permitted. For the owner will be afraid to break the lock to the door lest he be seen and the matter become known. (This approach is also mentioned in the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit).
8.
There is, however, nothing preventing him from selling it to other gentiles.
9.
I.e., he wrote the bill of sale in advance, before the Jew actually paid to clarify that his intent was to sell it to him.
The Siftei Cohen 131:1 writes that these stringencies apply only if the Jew did not pay the gentile anything at all. Once the Jew pays the gentile something, the wine is considered his and more lenient rules apply. It is questionable, however, if the Rambam would accept this leniency, for as stated in Chapter 12, Halachah 25, he rules that as long as wine is security for a debt, a gentile creditor will feel free to do with it as he desires.
10.
Since Jews can see whether or not the gentile touches it, he is afraid to do so, lest his investment be ruined. See the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Avodah Zarah4:11).
11.
Because these places are also in public view and/or acces.
12.
Our translation follows Rashi's commentary to Avodah Zarah 70a. The Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 129:16) defines the term as meaning pillars.
13.
Since the gentile would be considered as a thief for overstepping these boundaries, we do not fear that he would do so.
14.
Were a gentile to touch them, they would be disqualified.
15.
The rationale is that we assume that a gentile will not trouble himself to reseal the container with two seals as the Jew had sealed it. Hence the fact that he founds it with the two seals he left it is a sign that it has not been tampered with.
16.
To apply these concepts in contemporary terms: When a bottle of wine is closed with a cork or a bottle-cap, that is one seal. If there is a paper or plastic wrapper around the cork or the cap, that is the second seal.
17.
Based on Avodah Zarah 31a, some interpret this as is speaking about an instance where the corner the gentile grants the Jew is closed off with a seal. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 130:2) writes that there are opinions which rule that after the fact, one seal is sufficient in this situation.
The Lechem Mishneh explains that even if the place is not closed off, since it is designated for the Jew, one seal is sufficient. See Turei Zahav 130:4).
18.
For in none of these instances do we fear that the gentile will use the beverage for a libation, as stated in Chapter 11, Halachot 9-10.
19.
In these instances, we fear that the gentile will exchange another substance, for the substance deposited. One seal is sufficient to dispel these suspicions (Lechem Mishneh).
20.
Since the prohibition involved in these instances is Scriptural in origin, we are more stringent.
21.
See Chapter 11, Halachah 7. That halachah states that when a gentile who is not an idolater touches wine, it is only forbidden to drink it. In this instance, since the gentile did not intend to touch the wine, we are more lenient and do not forbid it at all (Radbaz).
As mentioned previously, the Rama (Yoreh De'ah 124:24) rules that in the present era, none of the gentiles are considered as idolaters and the leniency suggested by the Rambam applies universally. On that basis, he and the subsequent Ashkenazic authorities have suggested several leniencies.
22.
See Chapter 12, Halachot 5 and 9.
23.
A gentile who has made a formal commitment to accept the Seven Universal Laws Commanded to Noah and His Descendants. These include the prohibition against worshipping false divinities.
24.
I.e., a place where it can be exchanged without a Jew noticing.
25.
For we fear that he exchanged it with his own wine and it is forbidden to drink such wine. Although a resident alien also accepted the prohibition against theft, we fear that he - and certainly, other gentiles - will not abide by his commitment (Radbaz).
26.
For these are merely safeguards. Although Rashi (Avodah Zarah 58b) and otherRishonim rule more stringently, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 125:3,6,7) accepts the Rambam's position.
27.
Doing so does not arouse a suspicion that perhaps he used it as a libation for his false deity. Smelling is not considered as tasting or drinking.
28.
It is not included in the prohibition mentioned at the beginning of Ch. 11.
29.
See the conclusion of Ch. 5 of Hilchot Meilah, where the Rambam delivers a slightly contradictory ruling.
30.
Chapter 8, Halachah 16. See also Hilchot Avodat Kochavimn 7:9 and Hilchot Ishut 5:2.
31.
For he is deriving benefit from gentile wine.
32.
Even though the Jew himself does nothing to help transport the gentile wine.
33.
I.e., throw in a place where neither he nor anyone else will benefit from them.
34.
Nor others.
35.
For the rental fee was not primarily paid for the sake of the wine (Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 133:3). The Radbaz emphasizes that this leniency applies when the donkey was rented primarily for human transport and, by the way, the gentile placed wine upon it. If, however, he rented it primarily to transport packages - and later the owner discovered that wine was included among them - the rental fee is forbidden even if the person also rides on the donkey.
36.
He is being paid for the entire work as a collective entity. Were he not to have transported all the barrels, he would not be paid at all (Rashi, Avodah Zarah 65a). Accordingly, the payment for transporting the beer was never distinct from that of the wine. Hence his entire wage is forbidden.
The Ra'avad differs and maintains that it is sufficient to destroy the wage paid for the forbidden barrels. The Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 133:3) follows the Rambam's stringency.
37.
Since the wage was paid for each barrel individually, the wage paid for the barrels of beer is a separate and distinct entity. Hence it is not forbidden. Nevertheless, at the outset, it is forbidden to accept such a job [Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.)].
38.
For the craftsman have not accepted the wine and the employer owes them money.
39.
For then it is as if they are exchanging the wine for wine.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 132:3) writes that in the present age, (when gentiles are not actually idolaters,) a worker may return the barrel of wine even though it has entered his domain.
40.
One hundred silver zuzim.
41.
Hence he has benefited from existence of the gentile wine. Hence, it is forbidden.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 132:7) states that, even if the Jew desires that the false deity continue to exist, leniency can be granted in an instance where the gentile has other resources to pay the debt or alternatively, when the debt is secured by a guarantor. Moreover, if all that is concerned is ordinary gentile wine, in the present age, there is no prohibition for the reason stated above.
42.
Here leniency is not granted, because the convert has a share in the entities belonging to the partnership. Thus he is exchanging money for a false deity.
43.
I.e., our Sages feared that the convert will be so disturbed about being unable to receive his inheritance, that he will forsake Jewish practice and return to his previous mode of conduct. This is undesirable, because once a person converts, he is a full-fledged Jew. If he conducts himself undesirably, his conduct affects the entire Jewish people.
44.
For they have already entered the domain of the convert and are, therefore, forbidden. Hence it is forbidden to exchange them for others, for then one will be deriving benefit.
45.
I.e., he acquires the wine through the kinyanof meshichah [see Maggid Mishneh, Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 1:14; Turei Zahav132:4) and the money is considered as a loan which he owes the Jew.
The Radbaz questions why the Rambam mentions meshichah, drawing the wine into his own domain. Seemingly, once a price was established and the wine was poured, the gentile acquires it whether or not he performs meshichah immediately. Conversely, if meshichah finalizes the transaction, seemingly as long as a price was set before meshichah, the wine should be permitted
The Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam is speaking according to the common practice. It was customary to establish a price either before measuring the wine or after meshichah.
46.
For he fears that the Jew will ask an exorbitant price (Radbaz). Hence he always keeps the option of negating the sale.
47.
For the payment of the money formalizes the transfer of the wine (effecting a kinyan), Thus the gentile has paid for the wine before it entered his domain and became forbidden.
48.
There are several explanations for this ruling. The gentile left some of his wine in the container and thus as the Jew was pouring the new wine in, it became forbidden. Alternatively, the gentile was holding the container and moved it (see Chapter 12, Halachah 3). This is sufficient to cause the wine to become forbidden (Radbaz).
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, stating that (as the Rambam himself rules in Chapter 16, Halachah 29) if kosher wine becomes mixed with non-kosher wine, it is forbidden to drink it, but one may benefit from it. Nevertheless, he does not provide a rebuttal to the second explanation given above.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that since the wine in the container the gentile is holding becomes forbidden, the wine the Jew is pouring also becomes forbidden, as stated above in Chapter 12, Halachah 12.
49.
Since he gave the storekeeper the money in advance, it is as if he paid the storekeeper for what his worker would eat. Thus it is as if the worker is drinking the employer's wine.
50.
The Rambam's source (Avodah Zarah 58b) mentions both produce from the Sabbatical year and untithed produce, because it is possible that a common person is lax in his observance of both these mitzvot. Apparently, the Rambam also had this intent because he begins by mentioning produce of the Sabbatical year and concludes by mentioning untithed produce.
51.
I.e., it is forbidden for the employer to do this, because it would be considered as if he personally gave his employee produce from the Sabbatical year or untithed produce.
52.
I.e., he undertakes a financial obligation to the storekeeper, but since he does not pay him the money beforehand, that obligation is not explicitly associated with the food or drink of which the worker partakes.
53.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 450:6) mentions opinions that ate more stringent with regard to an employer taking financial responsibility for the food a gentile will eat on Pesach. The Turei Zahav 460:4 explains that with regard to Pesach, there is a greater reason for stringency, for it is almost certain that the gentile will eat chametz. In the situations mentioned in our halachah, by contrast, it is possible that none of the prohibitions will be violated, for the gentile will not want wine, nor the Jewish workers, the untithed or Sabbatical produce.
54.
A gentile king produced wine from the royal vineyard as a means of financing his nation's expenses. He would obligate each of the person's in his kingdom to buy a standard amount of wine. For a Jew, that represents a problem for the wine is gentile wine. Not only is it forbidden to drink it, it is forbidden to benefit from it. Thus not only may a Jew not partake of such wine, nor may he take it and sell it. He is forbidden even to purchase it from the king.
This represents the Rambam's interpretation of Avodah Zarah 71a. It is quoted by the Rashba and other Rishonim. Rashi, the Ra'avad, and others, however, have different interpretations of the passage. TheShulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 132:6) quotes the Rambam's interpretation.
55.
The Radbaz explains that in this way, the gentile is purchasing the wine from the Jew. Others explain that the gentile is acting as the Jew's agent.
56.
For in this way, the gentile is not acting as the Jew's agent.
57.
This law applies when the gentile intentionally touches the wine. If the gentile touches it unintentionally, he is not liable. The rationale is that this is damage which is not outwardly noticeable (i.e., although the ritual status of the wine has changed, outwardly it is the same). In such an instance, Hilchot Chovel UMazik 7:3 states, one is not liable for causing damage inadvertently.
The Kessef Mishneh states that even if the gentile intentionally touched the wine, but did not know that by touching it, he caused it to be forbidden, the gentile is not liable and this leniency does not apply. The Siftei Cohen132:2, however, interprets this wording as implying that even if the gentile caused it to become forbidden inadvertently, the Jew may sell it to him.
See also Hilchot Chovel UMazik 7:4 and commentaries, where a similar concept is discussed.
58.
For if the Jew could have stopped the gentile from touching the wine and didn't, he is responsible for the loss (Radbaz).
59.
The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 124:2) rules that in the present age, when it is not customary for gentiles to use wine as libations, the wine may be sold to any gentile.
60.
Avodah Zarah 59b states that in such a situation, he may charge the gentile the full price of the wine.
---------------------
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Wednesday, Adar I 15, 5776 · 24 February 2016
Shabbat 15 Adar I, Shushan Purim Katan 5703
Av Harachamim (p. 191) and Tzidkat'cha (p. 209) are not said.
Torah lessons: Chumash: Tetzaveh, Shevi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 77-78.
Tanya: In addition (p. 129)...in the holy Zohar (p. 133).
Before pronouncing the b'racha hamotzi, a scratch is made on the bread with the knife, but we are careful not to cut into it.
Even when saying kiddush over bread, we still say savri maranan (p. 141).
It is said of the Time To Come:1 "A stone in the wall will cry out and a beam from the tree will respond." At present, inert creations are mute; though trodden upon, they remain silent. But there will come a time when the revelation of the Future becomes a reality, that the inert will begin to speak, relate and demand: "If a man was walking along without thinking or speaking words of Torah, why did he trample upon me?"
The earth trodden upon has been waiting for millenia, ever since the Six Days of Creation. All kinds of living creatures have been treading upon it all this time, but it is waiting for a Jew (or two Jews) to walk on it while discussing Torah. But if they do not say words of Torah, the earth will protest: "You too are just like an animal!"
FOOTNOTES
1. Chabakuk 2:11.---------------------
CHABAD - TODAY IN JUDAISM: Friday, February 12, 2016 - Today is: Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · February 12, 2016 - Candle Lighting
Like a burning candle from which many candles are lit yet its own light is not diminished, so, too, Moses lost nothing that was his[Midrash rabbah]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Terumah, 6th Portion Exodus 27:1-27:8 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 27
1And you shall make the altar of acacia wood, five cubits long and five cubits wide; the altar shall be square, and its height [shall be] three cubits. אוְעָשִׂ֥יתָ אֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ עֲצֵ֣י שִׁטִּ֑ים חָמֵשׁ֩ אַמּ֨וֹת אֹ֜רֶךְ וְחָמֵ֧שׁ אַמּ֣וֹת רֹ֗חַב רָב֤וּעַ יִֽהְיֶה֙ הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ וְשָׁל֥שׁ אַמּ֖וֹת קֹֽמָתֽוֹ:
And you shall make the altar…and its height [shall be] three cubits:The words are [to be understood] literally. These are the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Jose says: It says here “square,” and concerning the inner altar, it says “square” (Exod. 30:2). Just as there, its height was twice its length [i.e, it was one cubit long and two cubits high], here too, its height was twice its length. [This method of expounding is known as גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה, similar wording.] How then do I understand “and its height [shall be] three cubits"? [This means measuring] from the edge of the sovev [the ledge surrounding the altar] and higher. — [from Zev 60a] [According to Rabbi Judah, the altar was literally three cubits high. According to Rabbi Yose, it was ten cubits high, with the upper three cubits above the ledge mentioned in verse 5] ועשית את המזבח וגו' ושלש אמות קומתו: דברים ככתבן, דברי ר' יהודה. ר' יוסי אומר נאמר כאן רבוע, ונאמר בפנימי רבוע, מה להלן גבהו פי שנים כארכו, אף כאן גבהו פי שנים כארכו. ומה אני מקיים ושלש אמות קומתו, משפת סובב ולמעלה:
2And you shall make its horns on its four corners; its horns shall be from it, and you shall overlay it with copper. בוְעָשִׂ֣יתָ קַרְנֹתָ֗יו עַ֚ל אַרְבַּ֣ע פִּנֹּתָ֔יו מִמֶּ֖נּוּ תִּֽהְיֶ֣יןָ קַרְנֹתָ֑יו וְצִפִּיתָ֥ אֹת֖וֹ נְחֽשֶׁת:
its horns shall be from it: [This means] that he should not make them [the horns] separately and [then] attach them to it [the altar]. ממנו תהיין קרנתיו: שלא יעשם לבדם ויחברם בו:
and you shall overlay it with copper: to atone for brazenness, as it is said: “and your forehead is brazen (נְחוֹּשָה)” (Isa. 48:4). [I.e., נְחֹשֶת, which means copper, is also used idiomatically to mean brazen or bold.]-[from Tanchuma 11] וצפית אותו נחשת: לכפר על עזות מצח, שנאמר (ישעיה מח ד) ומצחך נחושה:
3And you shall make its pots to remove its ashes, and its shovels and its sprinkling basins and its flesh hooks and its scoops; you shall make all its implements of copper. גוְעָשִׂ֤יתָ סִּֽירֹתָיו֙ לְדַשְּׁנ֔וֹ וְיָעָיו֙ וּמִזְרְקֹתָ֔יו וּמִזְלְגֹתָ֖יו וּמַחְתֹּתָ֑יו לְכָל־כֵּלָ֖יו תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה נְחֽשֶׁת:
its pots: Heb. סִּירֹתָיו, sort of kettles. — [from targumim] סירותיו: כמין יורות:
to remove its ashes: Heb. לְדַשְׂנוֹ, to remove its ashes [and place them] into them [the kettles]. This is what Onkelos rendered: לְמִסְפֵּי קִטְמֵיהּ, to remove its ashes into them. In Hebrew, some words [are used in such a manner that] one word [i.e., the same root] changes in its meaning to serve [both] as building and demolishing [i.e., it has a positive and a negative meaning], like, “it took root (וַךְתַַּשְׁרֵשׁ)” (Ps. 80:10), “a fool taking root (מַשְׁרִישׁ)” (Job 5:3), and its opposite, “and it uproots (תְשָׁרֵשׁ) all my grain” (Job 31:12); similar to this, “on its branches (בִּסְעִיפֶיהָ) when it produces fruit” (Isa. 17:6), and its opposite, “lops off (מְסָעֵף) the branches” (Isa. 10:33); similar to this, “and this last one broke his bones (עִצְּמוֹ)” (Jer. 50:17) [עִצְּמוֹ, which usually means “became boned,” here means] “broke his bones” ; similar to this, “and stoned him with stones (וַיִּסְקְלֻהוּ בָּאִבָנִים)” (I Kings 21:13), and its opposite, "clear it of stones (סַקְּלוּ מֵאֶבֶן) ” (Isa. 62:10), [meaning] remove its stones, and so, “and he fenced it in, and he cleared it of stones (וַיִּסְקְלֵהוּ)” (Isa. 5:2). Here too, לְדַשְׁנוֹ means “to remove its ashes (דִשְׁנוֹ),” and in Old French, adeszandrer, to remove ashes. לדשנו: להסיר דשנו לתוכם, והוא שתרגם אונקלוס למספי קטמיה, לספות הדשן לתוכם, כי יש מלות בלשון עברית מלה אחת מתחלפת בפתרון לשמש בנין וסתירה, כמו (תהלים פ י) ותשרש שרשיה, (איוב ה ג) אויל משריש. וחלופו (שם לא יב) ובכל תבואתי תשרש. וכמוהו (ישעיה יז ו) בסעיפיה פוריה, וחלופו (שם י לג) מסעף פארה, מפשח סעיפיה, וכמוהו (ירמיה נ יז) וזה האחרון עצמו, שבר עצמיו, וכמוהו (מלכים א' כא יג) ויסקלוהו באבנים, וחלופו (ישעיה סב י) סקלו מאבן, הסירו אבניה, וכן (שם ה ב). ויעזקהו ויסקלהו, אף כאן לדשנו להסיר דשנו ובלעז אישצינדרי"ר [לפנות האפר]:
and its shovels: Heb. וְיָעָיו. [Its meaning is] as the Targum [Onkelos renders: וּמַגְרפְיָתֵיה]: shovels with which he [the kohen] takes the ashes. They are [similar to] a kind of thin, metal lid of a pot, and it has a handle. In Old French [it is called] videl, vedil, vadil, [all meaning] shovel. ויעיו: כתרגומו, מגרפות שנוטל בהם הדשן, והן כמין כסוי הקדרה של מתכת דק ולו בית יד, ובלעז וידי"ל [יעה]:
and its sprinkling basins: Heb. וּמִזְרְקֹתָיו, with which to receive the blood of the sacrifices. ומזרקתיו: לקבל בהם דם הזבחים:
and its flesh hooks: Heb. וּמִזְלְגֹתָיו. Sort of bent hooks, with which he [the kohen] would strike the [sacrificial] flesh. They [the hooks] would be imbedded into it, and with them, he would turn it over on the coals of the [altar] pyre in order to hasten its burning. In Old French [they are called] crozins, [meaning flesh] hooks, and in the language of the Sages [they are called], צִינוֹרִיּוֹת (Yoma 12a). ומזלגתיו: כמין אונקליות כפופים, ומכה בהם בבשר ונתחבים בו ומהפך בהן על גחל המערכה שיהא ממהר שריפתן ובלעז קרוצינ"ש [אנקולים] ובלשון חכמים צינוריות:
and its scoops: Heb. וּמַחְךְתֹּתָיו. They had a cavity in which to take coals from the altar and to carry them onto the inner altar for incense [which was within the Mishkan]. Because of their [function of] scooping (חֲתִיֹּתָן), they are called scoops (מַחְךְתּוֹת), like “to scoop (לַחְךְתּוֹת) fire from a hearth” (Isa. 30:14), an expression of raking fire from its place, and likewise, “Can a man rake (הִיַחְךְתֶּה) embers with his clothes?” (Prov. 6:27). ומחתתיו: בית קבול יש להם ליטול בהן גחלים מן המזבח לשאתם על מזבח הפנימי לקטרת, ועל שם חתייתן קרויים מחתות, כמו (ישעיה ל יד) לחתות אש מיקוד, לשון שאיבת אש ממקומה, וכן (משלי ו כז) היחתה איש אש בחיקו:
all its implements: Heb. לְכָל-כֵּלָיו. Like כָּל כֵּלָיו. לכל כליו: כמו כל כליו:
4And you shall make for it a copper grating of netting work, and you shall make on the netting four copper rings on its four ends. דוְעָשִׂ֤יתָ לּוֹ֙ מִכְבָּ֔ר מַֽעֲשֵׂ֖ה רֶ֣שֶׁת נְח֑שֶׁת וְעָשִׂ֣יתָ עַל־הָרֶ֗שֶׁת אַרְבַּע֙ טַבְּעֹ֣ת נְח֔שֶׁת עַ֖ל אַרְבַּ֥ע קְצוֹתָֽיו:
grating: Heb. מִכְבָּר, a word meaning a sieve (כְּבָרָה), which is called crible [in French], [meaning] a sort of garment made for the altar, made with holes like a sort of net. This verse is inverted, and this is its meaning: And you shall make for it a copper grating of netting work. מכבר: לשון כברה, שקורין קריבל"א [כברה] כמין לבוש עשוי לו למזבח, עשוי חורין חורין כמין רשת. ומקרא זה מסורס וכה פתרונו ועשית לו מכבר נחשת מעשה רשת:
5And you shall place it beneath the ledge of the altar from below, and the net shall [extend downward] until the middle of the altar. הוְנָֽתַתָּ֣ה אֹתָ֗הּ תַּ֛חַת כַּרְכֹּ֥ב הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ מִלְּמָ֑טָּה וְהָֽיְתָ֣ה הָרֶ֔שֶׁת עַ֖ד חֲצִ֥י הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ:
the ledge of the altar: Heb. כַּרְכֹּב, a surrounding ledge. Anything that encircles anything else is called כַּרְכֹּב, as we learned in [the chapter entitled] Everyone May Slaughter (Chul. 25a): “The following are unfinished wooden vessels: Any [vessel] that is destined to be smoothed or banded (לְכַרְכֵּב).” This [refers to the practice] of making round grooves [or bands] in the planks of the walls of wooden chests and benches. For the altar as well, he [Bezalel] made a groove around it a cubit wide. [The groove was] on its wall for decoration, and that was at the end of three (other editions: six) cubits of its height, according to the one who says that its height was twice its length and [asks] how then can I understand [the verse] "and three cubits its height"? [Three cubits] from the edge of the ledge and higher. There was, however, no surrounding ledge [i.e., walkway] on the copper altar for the kohanim to walk on, except on its top, within its horns. So we learned in Zev. (62a): What is the ledge? [The space] between one horn and the other horn which was a cubit wide. Within that there was a cubit for the kohanim to walk, and these two cubits are called כַּרְכֹּב. We [the Sages of the Gemara] questioned this: But is it not written, "beneath the ledge of the altar from below"? [Thus we learned] that the כַּרְכֹּב was on its [the altar’s] wall, and the “garment” of the grating was below it [the ledge]. The one who answered [i.e., one of the Sages of the Gemara] replied: “There were two [ledges], one for beauty and one so that the kohanim should not slip.” The one on the wall was for decoration, and below it, they adorned [it with] the grating, whose width extended halfway up the altar. Thus, the grating was a cubit wide, and this was the sign of the middle of its [the altar’s] height, to distinguish between the upper “bloods” and the lower “bloods” [i. e., the blood of the sacrifices required to be sprinkled on the top of the altar and the blood of the sacrifices required to be sprinkled on the bottom of the altar]. Corresponding to this, they made for the altar in the Temple a kind of red line [other editions: the “girdle” of the red line] in it [the altar’s] center [point] (Middoth 3:1) and a ramp upon which they [the kohanim] would ascend it [the altar]. Although [the Torah] did not explain it in this section, we were already informed in the parsha [that begins] “An altar of earth you shall make for Me” (Exod. 20:21-23): “And you shall not ascend with steps.” [I.e.,] you shall not make steps for it on its ramp, but [you shall make] a smooth ramp. [Thus] we learn that it [the altar] had a ramp. [All the above] we learned in the Mechilta (Exod. 20:23). The “altar of earth” [mentioned in Exod. 20:21] was the copper altar, which they filled with earth in [all] the places of their encampment. The ramp was to the south of the altar, separated from the altar by a hairbreadth. Its base reached [until] a cubit adjacent to the hangings of the courtyard on the Mishkan’s southern [side], according to [the opinion of] those who say that it was ten cubits high. According to the opinion of those who say that the words are [to be understood] literally -"its height [shall be] three cubits" (verse 1)-the ramp was only ten cubits long. I found this in the Mishnah of Forty-Nine Middoth. [What I stated,] that it [the ramp] was separated from the altar by the width of a thread [i.e., a hairbreadth], [derives from] Tractate Zevachim (62b), [where] we learned it from the text. כרכב המזבח: סובב, כל דבר המקיף סביב בעגול קרוי כרכוב, כמו ששנינו בהכל שוחטין (חולין כה א) אלו הן גולמי כלי עץ, כל שעתיד לשוף ולכרכב, והוא כמו שעושין חריצין עגולין בקרשי דפני התיבות וספסלי העץ, אף למזבח עשה חריץ סביבו והיה רחבו אמה בדפנו לנוי והוא לסוף שש אמות של גבהו, כדברי האומר גבהו פי שנים כארכו, הא מה אני מקיים ושלש אמות קומתו, משפת סובב ולמעלה. אבל סובב להלוך הכהנים לא היה למזבח הנחשת אלא על ראשו לפנים מקרנותיו, וכן שנינו בזבחים (סב ב) איזהו כרכוב, בין קרן לקרן ולפנים מהן אמה של הלוך רגלי הכהנים, ושתי אמות הללו קרויים כרכוב. ודקדקנו שם והכתיב תחת כרכוב המזבח מלמטה, למדנו שהכרכוב בדפנו הוא ולבוש המכבר תחתיו. ותירץ המתרץ תרי הוו, חד לנוי וחד לכהנים דלא ישתרגו. זה שבדופן לנוי היה ומתחתיו הלבישו המכבר והגיע רחבו עד חצי המזבח. נמצא שהמכבר רחב אמה, והוא היה סימן לחצי גבהו להבדיל בין דמים העליונים לדמים התחתונים. וכנגדו עשו למזבח בית עולמים חגורת חוט הסקרא באמצעו. וכבש שהיו עולין בו אף על פי שלא פירשו בענין זה, כבר שמענו בפרשת (לעיל כ כ) מזבח אדמה תעשה לי (לעיל כ כב) ולא תעלה במעלות, לא תעשה לי מעלות בכבש שלו אלא כבש חלק למדנו שהיה לו כבש, כך שנינו במכילתא. ומזבח אדמה הוא מזבח הנחשת שהיו ממלאין חללו אדמה במקום חנייתן. והכבש היה בדרום המזבח מובדל מן המזבח מלא חוט השערה, ורגליו מגיעין עד אמה סמוך לקלעי החצר שבדרום, כדברי האומר עשר אמות קומתו. ולדברי האומר דברים ככתבן שלש אמות קומתו לא היה אורך הכבש אלא עשר אמות, כך מצאתי במשנת מ"ט מדות, וזה שהיה מובדל מן המזבח מלא החוט, במסכת זבחים (סב ב) למדוה מן המקרא:
6And you shall make poles for the altar, poles of acacia wood, and you shall overlay them with copper. ווְעָשִׂ֤יתָ בַדִּים֙ לַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ בַּדֵּ֖י עֲצֵ֣י שִׁטִּ֑ים וְצִפִּיתָ֥ אֹתָ֖ם נְחֽשֶׁת:
7And its poles shall be inserted into the rings, and the poles shall be on both sides of the altar when it is carried. זוְהוּבָ֥א אֶת־בַּדָּ֖יו בַּטַּבָּעֹ֑ת וְהָי֣וּ הַבַּדִּ֗ים עַל־שְׁתֵּ֛י צַלְעֹ֥ת הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ בִּשְׂאֵ֥ת אֹתֽוֹ:
into the rings: Into the four rings that were made for the grating. בטבעות: בארבע טבעות שנעשו למכבר:
8You shall make it hollow, out of boards; as He showed you on the mountain, so shall they do. חנְב֥וּב לֻחֹ֖ת תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֣ה אֹת֑וֹ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֨ר הֶרְאָ֥ה אֹֽתְךָ֛ בָּהָ֖ר כֵּ֥ן יַֽעֲשֽׂוּ:
hollow, out of boards: Heb. נְבוּב לֻחֹת as the Targum [Onkelos and Jonathan] renders: חִלִיל לוּחִין. [There should be] boards of acacia wood from all sides with a space in the middle. But all of it shall not be [made of] one piece of wood [that would measure] five cubits by five cubits, like a sort of anvil [i.e., like one solid block]. נבוב לחת: כתרגומו חליל לוחין. לוחות עצי שטים מכל צד והחלל באמצע, ולא יהא כולו עץ אחד שיהא עביו חמש אמות על חמש אמות כמין סדן:
---------------------
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 18 - 22
• Hebrew text
• English text
• Chapter 18
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 27
• Lessons in Tanya
• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · February 12, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 27
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · February 12, 2016
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 223
The Suspected Adulteress
"Should any man's wife go astray"—Numbers 5:12.
In the event that a woman is suspected of adultery [and there is significant circumstantial evidence pointing to her infidelity], we are commanded to follow the pertinent laws detailed in the Torah. This includes her bringing a special meal offering in the Holy Temple and drinking a special potion.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Negative Commandment 104
Oil on the Suspected Adulteress' Meal Offering
"He shall pour no oil upon it"—Numbers 5:15.
It is forbidden to mix oil into the suspected adulteress' meal offering [as is done by almost all other meal offerings].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Wednesday, Adar I 15, 5776 · 24 February 2016
Shabbat 15 Adar I, Shushan Purim Katan 5703
Av Harachamim (p. 191) and Tzidkat'cha (p. 209) are not said.
Torah lessons: Chumash: Tetzaveh, Shevi'i with Rashi.
Tehillim: 77-78.
Tanya: In addition (p. 129)...in the holy Zohar (p. 133).
Before pronouncing the b'racha hamotzi, a scratch is made on the bread with the knife, but we are careful not to cut into it.
Even when saying kiddush over bread, we still say savri maranan (p. 141).
It is said of the Time To Come:1 "A stone in the wall will cry out and a beam from the tree will respond." At present, inert creations are mute; though trodden upon, they remain silent. But there will come a time when the revelation of the Future becomes a reality, that the inert will begin to speak, relate and demand: "If a man was walking along without thinking or speaking words of Torah, why did he trample upon me?"
The earth trodden upon has been waiting for millenia, ever since the Six Days of Creation. All kinds of living creatures have been treading upon it all this time, but it is waiting for a Jew (or two Jews) to walk on it while discussing Torah. But if they do not say words of Torah, the earth will protest: "You too are just like an animal!"
FOOTNOTES
1. Chabakuk 2:11.---------------------
• Daily Thought:
Dissatisfaction
Someone wrote that the Rebbe had said we should “never be satisfied with our past achievements.” The Rebbe crossed out the word “past.”
Some people tell you that if you’re never satisfied with your achievements, you’ll drive yourself nuts.
Ignore them. Look at whatever you’ve done and say, “If that’s good, double is better.”
Don’t let what you’ve done be the final measure of who you are.
---------------------CHABAD - TODAY IN JUDAISM: Friday, February 12, 2016 - Today is: Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · February 12, 2016 - Candle Lighting
Light Candles before sunset
Daily Quote:Like a burning candle from which many candles are lit yet its own light is not diminished, so, too, Moses lost nothing that was his[Midrash rabbah]
Daily Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Terumah, 6th Portion Exodus 27:1-27:8 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class• Exodus Chapter 27
1And you shall make the altar of acacia wood, five cubits long and five cubits wide; the altar shall be square, and its height [shall be] three cubits. אוְעָשִׂ֥יתָ אֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ עֲצֵ֣י שִׁטִּ֑ים חָמֵשׁ֩ אַמּ֨וֹת אֹ֜רֶךְ וְחָמֵ֧שׁ אַמּ֣וֹת רֹ֗חַב רָב֤וּעַ יִֽהְיֶה֙ הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ וְשָׁל֥שׁ אַמּ֖וֹת קֹֽמָתֽוֹ:
And you shall make the altar…and its height [shall be] three cubits:The words are [to be understood] literally. These are the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Jose says: It says here “square,” and concerning the inner altar, it says “square” (Exod. 30:2). Just as there, its height was twice its length [i.e, it was one cubit long and two cubits high], here too, its height was twice its length. [This method of expounding is known as גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה, similar wording.] How then do I understand “and its height [shall be] three cubits"? [This means measuring] from the edge of the sovev [the ledge surrounding the altar] and higher. — [from Zev 60a] [According to Rabbi Judah, the altar was literally three cubits high. According to Rabbi Yose, it was ten cubits high, with the upper three cubits above the ledge mentioned in verse 5] ועשית את המזבח וגו' ושלש אמות קומתו: דברים ככתבן, דברי ר' יהודה. ר' יוסי אומר נאמר כאן רבוע, ונאמר בפנימי רבוע, מה להלן גבהו פי שנים כארכו, אף כאן גבהו פי שנים כארכו. ומה אני מקיים ושלש אמות קומתו, משפת סובב ולמעלה:
2And you shall make its horns on its four corners; its horns shall be from it, and you shall overlay it with copper. בוְעָשִׂ֣יתָ קַרְנֹתָ֗יו עַ֚ל אַרְבַּ֣ע פִּנֹּתָ֔יו מִמֶּ֖נּוּ תִּֽהְיֶ֣יןָ קַרְנֹתָ֑יו וְצִפִּיתָ֥ אֹת֖וֹ נְחֽשֶׁת:
its horns shall be from it: [This means] that he should not make them [the horns] separately and [then] attach them to it [the altar]. ממנו תהיין קרנתיו: שלא יעשם לבדם ויחברם בו:
and you shall overlay it with copper: to atone for brazenness, as it is said: “and your forehead is brazen (נְחוֹּשָה)” (Isa. 48:4). [I.e., נְחֹשֶת, which means copper, is also used idiomatically to mean brazen or bold.]-[from Tanchuma 11] וצפית אותו נחשת: לכפר על עזות מצח, שנאמר (ישעיה מח ד) ומצחך נחושה:
3And you shall make its pots to remove its ashes, and its shovels and its sprinkling basins and its flesh hooks and its scoops; you shall make all its implements of copper. גוְעָשִׂ֤יתָ סִּֽירֹתָיו֙ לְדַשְּׁנ֔וֹ וְיָעָיו֙ וּמִזְרְקֹתָ֔יו וּמִזְלְגֹתָ֖יו וּמַחְתֹּתָ֑יו לְכָל־כֵּלָ֖יו תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה נְחֽשֶׁת:
its pots: Heb. סִּירֹתָיו, sort of kettles. — [from targumim] סירותיו: כמין יורות:
to remove its ashes: Heb. לְדַשְׂנוֹ, to remove its ashes [and place them] into them [the kettles]. This is what Onkelos rendered: לְמִסְפֵּי קִטְמֵיהּ, to remove its ashes into them. In Hebrew, some words [are used in such a manner that] one word [i.e., the same root] changes in its meaning to serve [both] as building and demolishing [i.e., it has a positive and a negative meaning], like, “it took root (וַךְתַַּשְׁרֵשׁ)” (Ps. 80:10), “a fool taking root (מַשְׁרִישׁ)” (Job 5:3), and its opposite, “and it uproots (תְשָׁרֵשׁ) all my grain” (Job 31:12); similar to this, “on its branches (בִּסְעִיפֶיהָ) when it produces fruit” (Isa. 17:6), and its opposite, “lops off (מְסָעֵף) the branches” (Isa. 10:33); similar to this, “and this last one broke his bones (עִצְּמוֹ)” (Jer. 50:17) [עִצְּמוֹ, which usually means “became boned,” here means] “broke his bones” ; similar to this, “and stoned him with stones (וַיִּסְקְלֻהוּ בָּאִבָנִים)” (I Kings 21:13), and its opposite, "clear it of stones (סַקְּלוּ מֵאֶבֶן) ” (Isa. 62:10), [meaning] remove its stones, and so, “and he fenced it in, and he cleared it of stones (וַיִּסְקְלֵהוּ)” (Isa. 5:2). Here too, לְדַשְׁנוֹ means “to remove its ashes (דִשְׁנוֹ),” and in Old French, adeszandrer, to remove ashes. לדשנו: להסיר דשנו לתוכם, והוא שתרגם אונקלוס למספי קטמיה, לספות הדשן לתוכם, כי יש מלות בלשון עברית מלה אחת מתחלפת בפתרון לשמש בנין וסתירה, כמו (תהלים פ י) ותשרש שרשיה, (איוב ה ג) אויל משריש. וחלופו (שם לא יב) ובכל תבואתי תשרש. וכמוהו (ישעיה יז ו) בסעיפיה פוריה, וחלופו (שם י לג) מסעף פארה, מפשח סעיפיה, וכמוהו (ירמיה נ יז) וזה האחרון עצמו, שבר עצמיו, וכמוהו (מלכים א' כא יג) ויסקלוהו באבנים, וחלופו (ישעיה סב י) סקלו מאבן, הסירו אבניה, וכן (שם ה ב). ויעזקהו ויסקלהו, אף כאן לדשנו להסיר דשנו ובלעז אישצינדרי"ר [לפנות האפר]:
and its shovels: Heb. וְיָעָיו. [Its meaning is] as the Targum [Onkelos renders: וּמַגְרפְיָתֵיה]: shovels with which he [the kohen] takes the ashes. They are [similar to] a kind of thin, metal lid of a pot, and it has a handle. In Old French [it is called] videl, vedil, vadil, [all meaning] shovel. ויעיו: כתרגומו, מגרפות שנוטל בהם הדשן, והן כמין כסוי הקדרה של מתכת דק ולו בית יד, ובלעז וידי"ל [יעה]:
and its sprinkling basins: Heb. וּמִזְרְקֹתָיו, with which to receive the blood of the sacrifices. ומזרקתיו: לקבל בהם דם הזבחים:
and its flesh hooks: Heb. וּמִזְלְגֹתָיו. Sort of bent hooks, with which he [the kohen] would strike the [sacrificial] flesh. They [the hooks] would be imbedded into it, and with them, he would turn it over on the coals of the [altar] pyre in order to hasten its burning. In Old French [they are called] crozins, [meaning flesh] hooks, and in the language of the Sages [they are called], צִינוֹרִיּוֹת (Yoma 12a). ומזלגתיו: כמין אונקליות כפופים, ומכה בהם בבשר ונתחבים בו ומהפך בהן על גחל המערכה שיהא ממהר שריפתן ובלעז קרוצינ"ש [אנקולים] ובלשון חכמים צינוריות:
and its scoops: Heb. וּמַחְךְתֹּתָיו. They had a cavity in which to take coals from the altar and to carry them onto the inner altar for incense [which was within the Mishkan]. Because of their [function of] scooping (חֲתִיֹּתָן), they are called scoops (מַחְךְתּוֹת), like “to scoop (לַחְךְתּוֹת) fire from a hearth” (Isa. 30:14), an expression of raking fire from its place, and likewise, “Can a man rake (הִיַחְךְתֶּה) embers with his clothes?” (Prov. 6:27). ומחתתיו: בית קבול יש להם ליטול בהן גחלים מן המזבח לשאתם על מזבח הפנימי לקטרת, ועל שם חתייתן קרויים מחתות, כמו (ישעיה ל יד) לחתות אש מיקוד, לשון שאיבת אש ממקומה, וכן (משלי ו כז) היחתה איש אש בחיקו:
all its implements: Heb. לְכָל-כֵּלָיו. Like כָּל כֵּלָיו. לכל כליו: כמו כל כליו:
4And you shall make for it a copper grating of netting work, and you shall make on the netting four copper rings on its four ends. דוְעָשִׂ֤יתָ לּוֹ֙ מִכְבָּ֔ר מַֽעֲשֵׂ֖ה רֶ֣שֶׁת נְח֑שֶׁת וְעָשִׂ֣יתָ עַל־הָרֶ֗שֶׁת אַרְבַּע֙ טַבְּעֹ֣ת נְח֔שֶׁת עַ֖ל אַרְבַּ֥ע קְצוֹתָֽיו:
grating: Heb. מִכְבָּר, a word meaning a sieve (כְּבָרָה), which is called crible [in French], [meaning] a sort of garment made for the altar, made with holes like a sort of net. This verse is inverted, and this is its meaning: And you shall make for it a copper grating of netting work. מכבר: לשון כברה, שקורין קריבל"א [כברה] כמין לבוש עשוי לו למזבח, עשוי חורין חורין כמין רשת. ומקרא זה מסורס וכה פתרונו ועשית לו מכבר נחשת מעשה רשת:
5And you shall place it beneath the ledge of the altar from below, and the net shall [extend downward] until the middle of the altar. הוְנָֽתַתָּ֣ה אֹתָ֗הּ תַּ֛חַת כַּרְכֹּ֥ב הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ מִלְּמָ֑טָּה וְהָֽיְתָ֣ה הָרֶ֔שֶׁת עַ֖ד חֲצִ֥י הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ:
the ledge of the altar: Heb. כַּרְכֹּב, a surrounding ledge. Anything that encircles anything else is called כַּרְכֹּב, as we learned in [the chapter entitled] Everyone May Slaughter (Chul. 25a): “The following are unfinished wooden vessels: Any [vessel] that is destined to be smoothed or banded (לְכַרְכֵּב).” This [refers to the practice] of making round grooves [or bands] in the planks of the walls of wooden chests and benches. For the altar as well, he [Bezalel] made a groove around it a cubit wide. [The groove was] on its wall for decoration, and that was at the end of three (other editions: six) cubits of its height, according to the one who says that its height was twice its length and [asks] how then can I understand [the verse] "and three cubits its height"? [Three cubits] from the edge of the ledge and higher. There was, however, no surrounding ledge [i.e., walkway] on the copper altar for the kohanim to walk on, except on its top, within its horns. So we learned in Zev. (62a): What is the ledge? [The space] between one horn and the other horn which was a cubit wide. Within that there was a cubit for the kohanim to walk, and these two cubits are called כַּרְכֹּב. We [the Sages of the Gemara] questioned this: But is it not written, "beneath the ledge of the altar from below"? [Thus we learned] that the כַּרְכֹּב was on its [the altar’s] wall, and the “garment” of the grating was below it [the ledge]. The one who answered [i.e., one of the Sages of the Gemara] replied: “There were two [ledges], one for beauty and one so that the kohanim should not slip.” The one on the wall was for decoration, and below it, they adorned [it with] the grating, whose width extended halfway up the altar. Thus, the grating was a cubit wide, and this was the sign of the middle of its [the altar’s] height, to distinguish between the upper “bloods” and the lower “bloods” [i. e., the blood of the sacrifices required to be sprinkled on the top of the altar and the blood of the sacrifices required to be sprinkled on the bottom of the altar]. Corresponding to this, they made for the altar in the Temple a kind of red line [other editions: the “girdle” of the red line] in it [the altar’s] center [point] (Middoth 3:1) and a ramp upon which they [the kohanim] would ascend it [the altar]. Although [the Torah] did not explain it in this section, we were already informed in the parsha [that begins] “An altar of earth you shall make for Me” (Exod. 20:21-23): “And you shall not ascend with steps.” [I.e.,] you shall not make steps for it on its ramp, but [you shall make] a smooth ramp. [Thus] we learn that it [the altar] had a ramp. [All the above] we learned in the Mechilta (Exod. 20:23). The “altar of earth” [mentioned in Exod. 20:21] was the copper altar, which they filled with earth in [all] the places of their encampment. The ramp was to the south of the altar, separated from the altar by a hairbreadth. Its base reached [until] a cubit adjacent to the hangings of the courtyard on the Mishkan’s southern [side], according to [the opinion of] those who say that it was ten cubits high. According to the opinion of those who say that the words are [to be understood] literally -"its height [shall be] three cubits" (verse 1)-the ramp was only ten cubits long. I found this in the Mishnah of Forty-Nine Middoth. [What I stated,] that it [the ramp] was separated from the altar by the width of a thread [i.e., a hairbreadth], [derives from] Tractate Zevachim (62b), [where] we learned it from the text. כרכב המזבח: סובב, כל דבר המקיף סביב בעגול קרוי כרכוב, כמו ששנינו בהכל שוחטין (חולין כה א) אלו הן גולמי כלי עץ, כל שעתיד לשוף ולכרכב, והוא כמו שעושין חריצין עגולין בקרשי דפני התיבות וספסלי העץ, אף למזבח עשה חריץ סביבו והיה רחבו אמה בדפנו לנוי והוא לסוף שש אמות של גבהו, כדברי האומר גבהו פי שנים כארכו, הא מה אני מקיים ושלש אמות קומתו, משפת סובב ולמעלה. אבל סובב להלוך הכהנים לא היה למזבח הנחשת אלא על ראשו לפנים מקרנותיו, וכן שנינו בזבחים (סב ב) איזהו כרכוב, בין קרן לקרן ולפנים מהן אמה של הלוך רגלי הכהנים, ושתי אמות הללו קרויים כרכוב. ודקדקנו שם והכתיב תחת כרכוב המזבח מלמטה, למדנו שהכרכוב בדפנו הוא ולבוש המכבר תחתיו. ותירץ המתרץ תרי הוו, חד לנוי וחד לכהנים דלא ישתרגו. זה שבדופן לנוי היה ומתחתיו הלבישו המכבר והגיע רחבו עד חצי המזבח. נמצא שהמכבר רחב אמה, והוא היה סימן לחצי גבהו להבדיל בין דמים העליונים לדמים התחתונים. וכנגדו עשו למזבח בית עולמים חגורת חוט הסקרא באמצעו. וכבש שהיו עולין בו אף על פי שלא פירשו בענין זה, כבר שמענו בפרשת (לעיל כ כ) מזבח אדמה תעשה לי (לעיל כ כב) ולא תעלה במעלות, לא תעשה לי מעלות בכבש שלו אלא כבש חלק למדנו שהיה לו כבש, כך שנינו במכילתא. ומזבח אדמה הוא מזבח הנחשת שהיו ממלאין חללו אדמה במקום חנייתן. והכבש היה בדרום המזבח מובדל מן המזבח מלא חוט השערה, ורגליו מגיעין עד אמה סמוך לקלעי החצר שבדרום, כדברי האומר עשר אמות קומתו. ולדברי האומר דברים ככתבן שלש אמות קומתו לא היה אורך הכבש אלא עשר אמות, כך מצאתי במשנת מ"ט מדות, וזה שהיה מובדל מן המזבח מלא החוט, במסכת זבחים (סב ב) למדוה מן המקרא:
6And you shall make poles for the altar, poles of acacia wood, and you shall overlay them with copper. ווְעָשִׂ֤יתָ בַדִּים֙ לַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ בַּדֵּ֖י עֲצֵ֣י שִׁטִּ֑ים וְצִפִּיתָ֥ אֹתָ֖ם נְחֽשֶׁת:
7And its poles shall be inserted into the rings, and the poles shall be on both sides of the altar when it is carried. זוְהוּבָ֥א אֶת־בַּדָּ֖יו בַּטַּבָּעֹ֑ת וְהָי֣וּ הַבַּדִּ֗ים עַל־שְׁתֵּ֛י צַלְעֹ֥ת הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ בִּשְׂאֵ֥ת אֹתֽוֹ:
into the rings: Into the four rings that were made for the grating. בטבעות: בארבע טבעות שנעשו למכבר:
8You shall make it hollow, out of boards; as He showed you on the mountain, so shall they do. חנְב֥וּב לֻחֹ֖ת תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֣ה אֹת֑וֹ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֨ר הֶרְאָ֥ה אֹֽתְךָ֛ בָּהָ֖ר כֵּ֥ן יַֽעֲשֽׂוּ:
hollow, out of boards: Heb. נְבוּב לֻחֹת as the Targum [Onkelos and Jonathan] renders: חִלִיל לוּחִין. [There should be] boards of acacia wood from all sides with a space in the middle. But all of it shall not be [made of] one piece of wood [that would measure] five cubits by five cubits, like a sort of anvil [i.e., like one solid block]. נבוב לחת: כתרגומו חליל לוחין. לוחות עצי שטים מכל צד והחלל באמצע, ולא יהא כולו עץ אחד שיהא עביו חמש אמות על חמש אמות כמין סדן:
---------------------
Daily Tehillim: Chapters 18 - 22
• Hebrew text
• English text
• Chapter 18
If one merits a public miracle, he should offer a song to God, including in his song all the miracles that have occurred since the day the world was created, as well as the good that God wrought for Israel at the giving of the Torah. And he should say: "He Who has performed these miracles, may He do with me likewise."
1. For the Conductor. By the servant of the Lord, by David, who chanted the words of this song to the Lord on the day the Lord delivered him from the hand of all his enemies, and from the hand of Saul.
2. He said, "I love You, Lord, my strength.
3. The Lord is my rock, my fortress, and my rescuer. My God is my strength in Whom I take shelter, my shield, the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.
4. With praises I call upon the Lord, and I am saved from my enemies.
5. For the pangs of death surrounded me, and torrents of evil people terrified me.
6. Pangs of the grave encompassed me; snares of death confronted me.
7. In my distress I called upon the Lord, I cried out to my God; and from His Sanctuary He heard my voice, and my supplication before Him reached His ears.
8. The earth trembled and quaked; the foundations of the mountains shook-they trembled when His wrath flared.
9. Smoke rose in His nostrils, devouring fire blazed from His mouth, and burning coals flamed forth from Him.
10. He inclined the heavens and descended, a thick cloud was beneath His feet.
11. He rode on a cherub and flew; He soared on the wings of the wind.
12. He made darkness His concealment, His surroundings His shelter-of the dense clouds with their dark waters.
13. Out of the brightness before Him, His clouds passed over, with hailstones and fiery coals.
14. The Lord thundered in heaven, the Most High gave forth His voice-hailstones and fiery coals.
15. He sent forth His arrows and scattered them; many lightnings, and confounded them.
16. The channels of water became visible, the foundations of the world were exposed-at Your rebuke, O Lord, at the blast of the breath of Your nostrils.
17. He sent from heaven and took me; He brought me out of surging waters.
18. He rescued me from my fierce enemy, and from my foes when they had become too strong for me.
19. They confronted me on the day of my misfortune, but the Lord was my support.
20. He brought me into spaciousness; He delivered me because He desires me.
21. The Lord rewar-ded me in accordance with my righteousness; He repaid me according to the cleanliness of my hands.
22. For I have kept the ways of the Lord, and have not transgressed against my God;
23. for all His laws are before me, I have not removed His statutes from me.
24. I was perfect with Him, and have guarded myself from sin.
25. The Lord repaid me in accordance with my righteousness, according to the cleanliness of my hands before His eyes.
26. With the kindhearted You act kindly, with the upright man You act uprightly.
27. With the pure You act purely, but with the crooked You act cun- ningly.
28. For the destitute nation You save, but haughty eyes You humble.
29. Indeed, You light my lamp; the Lord, my God, illuminates my darkness.
30. For with You I run against a troop; with my God I scale a wall.
31. The way of God is perfect; the word of the Lord is pure; He is a shield to all who take refuge in Him.
32. For who is God except the Lord, and who is a rock except our God!
33. The God Who girds me with strength, and makes my path perfect.
34. He makes my feet like deers', and stands me firmly on my high places.
35. He trains my hands for battle, my arms to bend a bow of bronze.
36. You have given me the shield of Your deliverance, Your right hand upheld me; Your humility made me great.
37. You have widened my steps beneath me, and my knees have not faltered.
38. I pursued my enemies and overtook them; I did not turn back until I destroyed them.
39. I crushed them so that they were unable to rise; they are fallen beneath my feet.
40. You have girded me with strength for battle; You have subdued my adversaries beneath me.
41. You have made my enemies turn their backs to me, and my foes I cut down.
42. They cried out, but there was none to deliver them; to the Lord, but He did not answer them.
43. I ground them as the dust before the wind, I poured them out like the mud in the streets.
44. You have rescued me from the quarrelsome ones of the people, You have made me the head of nations; a nation I did not know became subservient to me.
45. As soon as they hear of me they obey me; strangers deny to me [their disloyalty].
46. Strangers wither away, they are terrified in their strongholds.
47. The Lord lives; blessed is my Rock; exalted is the God of my deliverance.
48. You are the God Who executes retribution for me, and subjugates nations under me.
49. Who rescues me from my enemies, Who exalts me above my adversaries, Who delivers me from the man of violence.
50. Therefore I will laud You, Lord, among the nations, and sing to Your Name.
51. He grants His king great salvations, and bestows kindness upon His anointed, to David and his descendants forever."
Chapter 19
To behold God's might one should look to the heavens, to the sun, and to the Torah, from which awesome miracles and wonders can be perceived--wonders that lead the creations to tell of God's glory.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. The heavens recount the glory of the Almighty; the sky proclaims His handiwork.
3. Day to day speech streams forth; night to night expresses knowledge.
4. There is no utterance, there are no words; their voice is inaudible.
5. Their arc extends throughout the world; their message to the end of the earth. He set in them [the heavens] a tent for the sun,
6. which is like a groom coming forth from his bridal canopy, like a strong man rejoicing to run the course.
7. Its rising is at one end of the heavens, and its orbit encompasses the other ends; nothing is hidden from its heat.
8. The Torah of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the Lord is trustworthy, making wise the simpleton.
9. The precepts of the Lord are just, rejoicing the heart; the command of the Lord is clear, enlightening the eyes.
10. The fear of the Lord is pure, abiding forever; the judgments of the Lord are true, they are all righteous together.
11. They are more desirable than gold, than much fine gold; sweeter than honey or the drippings of honeycomb.
12. Indeed, Your servant is scrupulous with them; in observing them there is abundant reward.
13. Yet who can discern inadvertent wrongs? Purge me of hidden sins.
14. Also hold back Your servant from willful sins; let them not prevail over me; then I will be unblemished and keep myself clean of gross transgression.
15. May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable before You, Lord, my Strength and my Redeemer.
Chapter 20
If a loved one or relative is suffering-even in a distant place, where one is unable to help-offer this prayer on their behalf.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. May the Lord answer you on the day of distress; may the Name of the God of Jacob fortify you.
3. May He send your help from the Sanctuary, and support you from Zion.
4. May He remember all your offerings, and always accept favorably your sacrifices.
5. May He grant you your heart's desire, and fulfill your every counsel.
6. We will rejoice in your deliverance, and raise our banners in the name of our God; may the Lord fulfill all your wishes.
7. Now I know that the Lord has delivered His anointed one, answering him from His holy heavens with the mighty saving power of His right hand.
8. Some [rely] upon chariots and some upon horses, but we [rely upon and] invoke the Name of the Lord our God.
9. They bend and fall, but we rise and stand firm.
10. Lord, deliver us; may the King answer us on the day we call.
Chapter 21
One who is endowed with prosperity, and whose every desire is granted, ought not be ungrateful. He should praise and thank God, recognize Him as the cause of his prosperity, and trust in Him. For everything comes from the kindness of the One Above.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. The king rejoices in Your strength, Lord; how greatly he exults in Your deliverance!
3. You have given him his heart's desire, and You have never withheld the utterance of his lips.
4. You preceded him with blessings of good; You placed a crown of pure gold on his head.
5. He asked of You life, You gave it to him-long life, forever and ever.
6. His glory is great in Your deliverance; You have placed majesty and splendor upon him.
7. For You make him a blessing forever; You gladden him with the joy of Your countenance.
8. For the king trusts in the Lord, and in the kindness of the Most High-that he will not falter.
9. Your hand will suffice for all Your enemies; Your right hand will find those who hate You.
10. You will make them as a fiery furnace at the time of Your anger. May the Lord consume them in His wrath; let a fire devour them.
11. Destroy their offspring from the earth, their descendants from mankind.
12. For they intended evil against You, they devised evil plans which they cannot execute.
13. For You will set them as a portion apart; with Your bowstring You will aim at their faces.
14. Be exalted, O Lord, in Your strength; we will sing and chant the praise of Your might.
Chapter 22
Every person should pray in agony over the length of the exile, and our fall from prestige to lowliness. One should also take vows (for self-improvement) in his distress.
1. For the Conductor, on the ayelet hashachar, a psalm by David.
2. My God, my God, why have You forsaken me! So far from saving me, from the words of my outcry?
3. My God, I call out by day, and You do not answer; at night-but there is no respite for me.
4. Yet You, Holy One, are enthroned upon the praises of Israel.
5. In You our fathers trusted; they trusted and You saved them.
6. They cried to You and were rescued; they trusted in You and were not shamed.
7. And I am a worm and not a man; scorn of men, contempt of nations.
8. All who see me mock me; they open their lips, they shake their heads.
9. But one that casts [his burden] upon the Lord-He will save him; He will rescue him, for He desires him.
10. For You took me out of the womb, and made me secure on my mother's breasts.
11. I have been thrown upon You from birth; from my mother's womb You have been my God.
12. Be not distant from me, for trouble is near, for there is none to help.
13. Many bulls surround me, the mighty bulls of Bashan encircle me.
14. They open their mouths against me, like a lion that ravages and roars.
15. I am poured out like water, all my bones are disjointed; my heart has become like wax, melted within my innards.
16. My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaves to my palate; You set me in the dust of death.
17. For dogs surround me, a pack of evildoers enclose me; my hands and feet are like a lion's prey.
18. I count all my limbs, while they watch and gloat over me.
19. They divide my garments amongst them; they cast lots upon my clothing.
20. But You, Lord, do not be distant; my Strength, hurry to my aid!
21. Save my life from the sword, my soul from the grip of dogs.
22. Save me from the lion's mouth, as You have answered me from the horns of wild beasts.
23. I will recount [the praises of] Your Name to my brothers; I will extol You amidst the congregation.
24. You that fear the Lord, praise Him! Glorify Him, all you progeny of Jacob! Stand in awe of Him, all you progeny of Israel!
25. For He has not despised nor abhorred the entreaty of the poor, nor has He concealed His face from him; rather He heard when he cried to Him.
26. My praise comes from You, in the great congregation; I will pay my vows before those that fear Him.
27. Let the humble eat and be satisfied; let those who seek the Lord praise Him-may your hearts live forever!
28. All the ends of the earth will remember and return to the Lord; all families of nations will bow down before You.
29. For sovereignty is the Lord's, and He rules over the nations.
30. All the fat ones of the earth will eat and bow down, all who descend to the dust shall kneel before Him, but He will not revive their soul.
31. The progeny of those who serve Him will tell of the Lord to the latter generations.
32. They will come and relate His righteousness-all that He has done-to a newborn nation.
---------------------Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 27
• Lessons in Tanya
• English Text
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · February 12, 2016
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 27
ואדרבה, העצבות היא מגסות הרוח
On the contrary, such sadness is due to conceit.
שאינו מכיר מקומו, ועל כן ירע לבבו על שאינו במדרגת צדיק
For he does not know his place, and that is why he is distressed because he has not attained the level of a tzaddik,
שלצדיקים בודאי אין נופלים להם הרהורי שטות כאלו
to whom such foolish thoughts surely do not occur.
כי אילו הי׳ מכיר מקומו, שהוא רחוק מאד ממדרגת צדיק
For were he to recognize his station, that he is very far from the rank oftzaddik,
והלואי היה בינוני ולא רשע כל ימיו אפילו שעה אחת
and would that he be a Beinoni and not a rasha for even a single moment throughout his life (i.e., this is what he should be striving for at present, rather than vainly desiring to be a tzaddik),
הרי זאת היא מדת הבינונים ועבודתם
then surely, this is the due measure of the Beinonim and their task:
לכבוש היצר וההרהור העולה מהלב למוח, ולהסיח דעתו לגמרי ממנו ולדחותו בשתי ידים, כנ״ל
To subdue the evil impulse and the thought that rises from the heart to the mind, and to completely avert his mind from it, repulsing it as it were with both hands, as explained above in ch. 12.
The Alter Rebbe explained there that the evil in the soul of the Beinoni remains vigorous; his task is to prevent it from expressing itself in thought, speech, and action. Thus, he has no control over the occurence of evil thoughts in his mind, but only over his acceptance or rejection of these thoughts.
---------------------Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvos:• English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class• Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · February 12, 2016Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Positive Commandment 223
The Suspected Adulteress
"Should any man's wife go astray"—Numbers 5:12.
In the event that a woman is suspected of adultery [and there is significant circumstantial evidence pointing to her infidelity], we are commanded to follow the pertinent laws detailed in the Torah. This includes her bringing a special meal offering in the Holy Temple and drinking a special potion.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
The Suspected Adulteress
Positive Commandment 223
Translated by Berel Bell
The 223rd mitzvah is that we are commanded regarding the law of a sotah.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "If a man's wife is suspected of committing adultery...."
All the details of this mitzvah — how one makes her drink [the special water used to determine her innocence or guilt], how her sacrifice is offered, and other conditions that apply to her — are found in the tractate devoted to this subject, tractate Sotah.
FOOTNOTES
1.This term refers to a woman who is suspected by her husband of infidelity, who then warns her not to secluide herself with the suspected adulterer, and is then discovered to have done so.
2.Num. 5:12.
--------------------------------------------------------Negative Commandment 104
Oil on the Suspected Adulteress' Meal Offering
"He shall pour no oil upon it"—Numbers 5:15.
It is forbidden to mix oil into the suspected adulteress' meal offering [as is done by almost all other meal offerings].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Oil on the Suspected Adulteress' Meal Offering
Negative Commandment 104
Translated by Berel Bell
The 104th prohibition is that we are forbidden from mixing oil into the meal-offering brought for a sotah.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "He [the husband] must bring a sacrifice for her...he shall not place oil on it."
The punishment for bringing this offering with oil is lashes.
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 5:15.
------------------------------------------------------------
• 1 Chapter: Bikkurim Bikkurim - Chapter 10 • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
• Bikkurim - Chapter 10
Halacha 1
It is a positive commandment to give a priest the first shearings [of an animal],1 as [Deuteronomy 18:4] states: 'Give him the first shearings of your flock.' Levites are considered like Israelites with regard to this mitzvah.2 There is no minimum measure for these shearings according to Scriptural law. According to Rabbinical Law, one should not give less than a sixtieth. It applies only in Eretz [Yisrael],3 whether the Temple is standing or not like the first of the grain.4 It applies to ordinary animals, but not to consecrated ones.
Halacha 2
What is implied? A person consecrated animals for the Temple treasury5and then sheared them. Is he obligated to redeem them and give [the first shearings] to the priests? Or if one consecrated an animal with the exception of its shearings, is he obligated in the first shearings? It is written [ibid.]: "your sheep,' [i.e., the obligation applies only to "your sheep.'
Halacha 3
There is an obligation [to give a priest] the first shearing of any consecrated animals6 that possessed a permanent blemish before they were consecrated and were [then] redeemed.7 If, however, they were consecrated before they were blemished or it had a temporary blemish before it was consecrated,8 and afterwards, it received a permanent blemish and it was redeemed, it is exempt from the first shearing.9
Halacha 4
The only animals whose first shearings we are obligated [to give a priest] are sheep, both male and female, for their wool is fit [to make] garments. If their wool was stiff and not fit for [making] garments, they are exempt from the first shearings, for this present is given to the priest for the sole purpose of providing him with garments.10
Halacha 5
Since the Holy One, blessed be He, granted [a priest] the terumot which provide him with bread and wine11 and He granted him the presents of meat12and the sacrificial meat of the Temple for meat,13 He provided them with the first shearings for their garments and [restitution for property] stolen from a [childless] convert,14 devotion offerings,15 ancestral fields [that were consecrated and not redeemed],16 and the redemption of the firstborn,17for their expenses and for their other needs. [These are granted to the priests,] because they are not granted an ancestral portion of the land, nor a share in the spoils of war.18
Halacha 6
If [a sheep's] wool was [naturally] red, black, or brown, there is an obligation [to give the priest] the first shearings. If, however, the wool was shorn and dyed, before it was given [to a priest], he is exempt from the first shearings.19If one bleached it before he gave it [to the priests], he is obligated to set [the wool] aside after he bleaches it.20 When a person pulls out the wool of ewes by hand instead of shearing it, he is obligated in the first shearings.
Halacha 7
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
A person who purchases the shearings of a gentile's sheep after the gentile has shorn them is exempt from the first shearings.27 When he purchases [the gentile's] sheep for their shearing,28 he is obligated even though the wool grew in the gentile's domain and the sheep are returned to the gentile after the shearing. Since the shearer is Jewish and the shearings belong to him, he is obligated. For the obligation takes effect only at the time of shearing.
Halacha 10
[The following laws apply when] a person purchases the shearings of a fellow Jew. If the seller left a portion of his sheep to shear,29 the seller is obligated to separate from [the shearing of] the remainder [the appropriate amount] for the entire [flock. This applies] even if the seller has not begun to shear [his sheep.30 The rationale is that we operate under] the assumption that a person will not sell the presents to be given the priests.31 If [the seller] did not leave any [sheep to shear], the purchaser is obligated to separate [the first shearings].32
Halacha 11
[A different rule applies it] there are two types of shearings, e.g., white wool and brown wool, or wool from males and wool from females, and one sold one and retained possession of the other. Both [the purchaser and the seller] should give the first shearings, [the purchaser] on what he purchased and the seller on what he retained.33
Halacha 12
When a convert converts and he possesses sheep that are being shorn and it is not known whether they were shorn before he converted or after he converted, he is exempt. [The rationale is when] one desires to expropriate property from a colleague,34 the burden of proof is upon him.
Halacha 13
How many sheep must there be for [a flock] to be obligated for the first shearings? No less than five,35 provided their shearings is not less than the weight of 60 sela36 and the shearings of each one will not be less than the weight of 12 sela. If the shearings of one of them is less than the weight of twelve sela, [the flock] is exempt from the first shearing, even if [the wool of] the five of them weighs 60 selaim or more.
Halacha 14
Partners are obligated in [the mitzvah of] the first shearings, provided each one's share is equal to the minimum measure [mentioned above]. It: however, there are only five sheep belonging to two partners, they are exempt.37
Halacha 15
The mitzvah is to set aside the first shearing at the outset.38 If, however, one set it aside in the middle or at the end, he fulfilled his obligation.
When a person owns five sheep, but [did not shear them together, i.e.,] he had one shorn alone and sold its wool, and then had another shorn alone and sold its wool, and then a third, etc., all of these are combined [to obligate him in the mitzvah of] the first shearing,39 even if this takes place over the course of several years. He may separate from the new shearings for the old shearings and from [the shearings of] one type of sheep for another.40 If, however, he had one sheep, he sheared it and set aside its shearings, purchased a second sheep and set aside its shearings, [and continued doing so until he sheared five sheep], their shearings are not combined.41
Halacha 16
When a person has several shearings from the first shearings that he desired to divide among the priests, he should not give any priest less than the weight of five selaim of white wool, enough to make a small garment.
The intent is not that he should whiten it and give it to them. Instead, he should give each of them [at least enough] unrefined wool to produce five selaim42 or more of wool after it has been whitened. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 18:14:] 'Give it to him,' i.e., give him a significant present.
Halacha 17
The first shearings are ordinary property in every regard. Therefore, I maintain that they may be given to a woman of the priestly family even if she is married to an Israelite like the presents of meat.43 It appears to me that they are governed by the same laws.
FOOTNOTES
1.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 144) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 508) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
2.
I.e., as opposed to the presents described in the previous chapter, the Levites are required to separate these shearings.
3.
But not in the Diaspora. Thus it resemblesterumah - for both are called "first" and hence share similarilities in many laws - and not the presents of meat. Although theMishnah (Chulin 11:1) states that this mitzvah also applies in the Diaspora, according to the Rambam, the halachah does not follow that view.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 333:1) follows the Rambam's view. The Tur and the Rama state that theoretically, this mitzvah should also be observed in the Diaspora, but in practice, that view is not followed.
4.
I.e., terumah. See Hilchot Terumah 1:1.
5.
I.e., needless to say this law would apply if the animal was consecrated for the sake of sacrifice on the Altar, for in that instance, the animal is forbidden to be shorn and it is forbidden to work with it. Moreover, even if the animal is consecrated only for the sake of the Temple treasury, in which instance, it will ultimately be redeemed for personal use, since while it is consecrated, it is not "your sheep,' as the Rambam continues to explain, there is no obligation to give its first shearings.
6.
I.e., even if the animal was consecrated only for the sake of the Temple treasury, as above, these laws apply. The rationale is that a blemished kosher animal that is consecrated to the Temple treasury is redeemed with the intent to be used as a sacrifice.
7.
Since it was blemished at the time it was consecrated, the animal was never fit to be offered on the altar. Hence, the consecration never affected the actual physical substance of the animal. Accordingly, once it is redeemed, it is considered as an ordinary animal and its first shearings must be given to a priest
8.
Since the temporary blemish will be healed, it is considered as if did not exist.
9.
Since when consecrated, the animal was fit for sacrifice, the consecration affected its physical substance. Hence, even after it was redeemed, it is not considered as an ordinary animal and it is exempt from the first shearings. See the parallel in Chapter 9, Halachah2.
10.
Rav Yosef Corcus explains that the Rambam (based on one of the opinions inChulin 137a) is referring to the priestly garments which are made from wool and linen. For, otherwise, goats' wool is also fit to make ordinary garments. This explanation is also quoted by Siftei Cohen 333:2. The intent is not, however, that the first shearings should be used only for priestly garments, for as the Rambam states in the following halachah, the first shearings were given to the priests for their personal garments.
11.
According to the Rambam, the terumot also include oil and other fruits.
12.
Described in Chapter 9.
13.
I.e., the portions of the sin offerings, guilt offerings, and peace offerings which are granted to the priests.
14.
See Hilchot Gezeilah, Chapter 8.
15.
See Hilchot Arachin VaCharamim, Chapter 6.
16.
Which becomes the property of the priests; see Hilchot Arachin VaCharamim4:19.
17.
See Chapters 11 and 12.
18.
See Hilchot Shemitah VeYovel, Chapter 13, with regard to both these points.
19.
He is considered to have acquired the wool because he made a significant change in its nature. This ruling applies after the fact. As an initial preference, it is forbidden to make such a change [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 11:3; Rav Kappach's edition)].
20.
For this is not considered as a significant change.
21.
The Radbaz explains that this law depends on the concept stated in Halachah 4: If the wool of a hybrid (the offspring of a sheep or a goat) is soft, the first shearings must be separated. If not, it is exempt.
22.
As mentioned in the notes to Chapter 9, Halachah 5, the Rambam understands the term ko'i as referring to an animal which our Sages were unable to classify as a domesticated animal or a wild beast.
23.
For the animal is alive at present and the removal of its wool is considered as shearing.
24.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that this is derived from the very definition of the mitzvah, 'the shearing of the sheep.' A dead sheep is not considered a sheep and cutting its wool is not considered as shearing.
25.
The Radbaz questions why the first shearings are different than all the other presents given to the priests where such a law is not found. He explains that the other presents involve grain and meat and a granary or a slaughter house are not located at a great distance from the residential area of a city. Hence, it is not very difficult for a priest to go and collect them. Sheep, by contrast, may not be allowed to pasture near residential areas. Hence, since it is far more difficult for a priest to collect them, the Torah made the owners responsible for the shearings.
26.
Chulin 136b notes that in this respect, although they are also called "the first," the first shearings are different from terumahand challah. With regard to these separations, if one designates his entire crop as terumah 0r his entire dough aschallah, his statements are of no consequence. The Radbaz explains that the term terumah - and challah is also calledterumah - implies elevating one portion of a group from another portion. Hence, there must always be something left behind. The term 'the first shearings' does not have such a connotation.
Rav Yosef Corcus notes that Chulin 136b associates this ruling with the Rabbi Ila'ai's opinion that the first shearing applies in the Diaspora as well as in Eretz Yisrael. Thus there is an apparent contradiction between the Rambam's ruling here and his ruling in Halachah 1 that the mitzvah of the first shearing applies only in Eretz Yisrael. Rav Yosef explains that the Rambam's ruling in Halachah 1 is based on custom and not on the acceptance of the opinions that differ with Rabbi Ila'ai.
27.
This point is obvious. The Rambam (and his source, Chulin 138a) mention it only because of the contrast to the following laws. Rashi, however, interprets that passage differently. The Shulchan Aruch(Yoreh De'ah 333:7) follows the Rambam's understanding, while the Tur and the Rama follow Rashi's view.
28.
I.e., he never becomes the real owner of the sheep; he acquires them only for the right to shear their wool.
29.
And that portion contains the minimum measure mentioned in Halachah 13.
30.
Since the seller has not begun shearing the sheep at all, it would seem reasonable to say that each person should give the first shearings from his portion. Nevertheless, the ruling is not so.
31.
And thus they remain in his portion. Selling these presents is prohibited and we assume that the person would not desire to transgress.
32.
Chulin 138a explains that the seller tells the purchaser: 'I did not sell you the first shearings. The money I took from you is for the remainder of the wool that is not the priest's portion. I merely gave you the opportunity to give the presents to the priest of your choice."
33.
Even though one may separate the first shearings from one type of wool for another type as evident from Halachah 15, in this instance, since the two types are owned by two separate people, each should separate the first shearings from his own wool.
34.
I.e., the priest desires to expropriate the first shearings from the owner. See the parallel in Chapter 9, Halachah 13. The Radbaz explains that this ruling follows the principle: When there is a doubt concerning a prohibition, we rule stringently. When there is a doubt concerning financial matters, we rule leniently.
35.
Chulin 11:1 derives this from a non-literal interpretation of II Samuel 25:18.
36.
A sela is approximately 20 grams in contemporary measure.
Chulin 11:2 states that this measure is required, for only then will the gift to the priest be significant, for it will be possible to make a small garment from it.
37.
I.e., the Rambam follows the opinion (Chulin135a) that the partnership is not recognized as a single entity. Hence, it is necessary for the share of each of the partners to comprise at least the minimum amount. TheKessef Mishneh notes the parallel to Chapter 6, Halachah 20.
38.
The Radbaz states that this is implied by the very term 'the first of.'
39.
Because at the time he sheared the first sheep, he possessed a flock of the minimum size. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 333: 12) states that this applies even if he sold some of his sheep after shearing them.
40.
One should not, however, separate the shearings of inferior sheep for those of superior sheep [Rama (Yoreh De'ah333:12)].
41.
Because at the time he sheared the first sheep, he did not have a flock of the minimum size.
42.
Five selaim is 100 grams in contemporary measure. This measure of wool was sufficient to fashion a sash (avneit) for a priest (Chulin 138a).
43.
See Chapter 9, Halachah 20.
---------------------
• 3 Chapters: Sotah Sotah - Chapter One, Sotah Sotah - Chapter Two, Sotah Sotah - Chapter Three • English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download• Sotah - Chapter One
Audio: Listen | Download• Sotah - Chapter One
Halacha 1
The admonition of jealousy1 stated in the Torah [Numbers 5:14], "And he will adjure his wife," means the following. He tells her in the presence of witnesses: "Do not enter into privacy with this and this man."
This applies even if the man [under suspicion] is her father, her brother, a gentile, a servant or a man who is impotent and incapable of having an erection or fathering a child.2
Halacha 2
The term "enter into privacy" mentioned in the Torah [Ibid.:13] refers to entering into privacy with the man concerning whom she was warned, in the presence of two witnesses, not to enter into privacy.3
If she remains with him long enough to engage in relations - i.e., the amount of time necessary to roast an egg and swallow it,4 she is forbidden to her husband5 until she drinks the bitter water, and [her faithfulness] is checked. In an era when [the probe of] the waters of the sotah is unavailable, she is forbidden to her husband forever and is divorced without receiving the [money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.6
Halacha 3
If [a husband] warns his wife with regard to two men at the same time, telling her: "Do not enter into privacy with so and so, and so and so," she is forbidden [to her husband] until she drinks [the waters] if she enters into privacy with the two men at the same time,7 and remains there long enough to engage in relations. [This applies] even if [the two men] are her two brothers or her father and her brother.
Halacha 4
If he told her in the presence of two [men]: "Do not speak to so and so," this is not considered to be a warning. Even if she enters into privacy with him in the presence of witnesses and remains there long enough to engage in relations, she is not forbidden to [her husband], nor can she be required to drink [the bitter water] because of such a warning.
Halacha 5
Similarly, if he told her, "Do not enter into privacy with him," and witnesses saw her speaking with him, she is not considered to be having entered into privacy. She is not forbidden to [her husband], nor can she be required to drink [the bitter water].
Similarly, if she was not warned at all, and two witnesses came and testified that she entered into privacy with a man and remained long enough to engage in relations, she is not forbidden to [her husband],8 nor can she be required to drink [the bitter water].
Halacha 6
If he told her: "Do not enter into privacy with so and so," and named a boy below the age of nine,"9 or he told her: "Do not enter into privacy with this animal," this is not a [binding] warning.
[These laws are derived as follows:] The Torah [ibid.] states: "And a man had relations with her." This excludes a minor and an animal. She is not forbidden to her husband because of them.
Halacha 7
When a husband forgoes a warning before his wife enters into privacy with [the man in question], the warning is nullified, and it is as if he had never issued a warning to her [regarding him]. If, however, he forgoes the warning after she enters into privacy with him, the warning cannot be nullified.10
If he divorces his wife, it is as if he has nullified the warning. If he remarries her, he must issue a second warning [for her to be bound by it].
Halacha 8
If [the husband] issued a warning to [his wife] in the presence of two [witnesses] and then saw her enter into privacy with the man concerning whom she was warned, and she remained long enough to engage in relations, she becomes forbidden to him. He must divorce her and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.11
Similarly, if he hears people gossiping about her after she has been warned, that she entered into privacy with the man in question, to the extent that the women who weave at night by the moonlight chatter about her, saying that she committed adultery with the man concerning whom she has been warned, her husband is forbidden to remain married to her and must instead divorce her and pay her [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.12
Halacha 9
[The following rules apply when] one witness comes and testifies that, after a warning was issued, she entered into privacy with the man concerning whom she was warned and remained long enough to engage in relations. If [the husband] considers [the witness] to be faithful, and he relies on him, he must divorce her and pay her [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.13 If [he does] not [rely on that person], his wife remains permitted to him.14
Halacha 10
The court should issue a warning to the following women [who are suspected of immodest behavior]: a woman whose husband has become a deaf-mute or has lost control of his mental faculties, one whose husband is overseas or one whose husband is imprisoned. The intent is not to have [such a woman] drink [the bitter water],15 but rather to disqualify her from receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.16
Halacha 11
What is implied? If the court hears that people are gossiping about [a particular woman], they call her and tell her: "Do not enter into privacy with so and so." If witnesses come afterwards and testify that she entered into privacy with the man concerning whom she was warned, and remained long enough to engage in relations, the court prohibits her [from engaging in relations] with her husband forever and tears up her marriage contract.
When her husband returns, regains his health or is released from prison, he must give her a get.17 He cannot require her to drink [the bitter water], because he did not administer the warning himself.
Halacha 12
[The following rules apply if a woman was required to] drink the bitter water [because of her husband's suspicion of a particular man] and did not die as a result of them, and afterwards, her husband gave her a warning with regard to that same man. If she enters into privacy with him, he cannot make her drink because of him a second time. Instead, she becomes forbidden to her husband forever and must be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.18
If, however, her husband issued a warning to her regarding another man, and she entered into privacy with him in the presence of witnesses, she can be forced to drink the waters again. Indeed, this can happen several times, provided each time her husband has her drink because of another man.
Halacha 13
If a woman's husband had her drink [the bitter water] because of a specific man and then divorced her and she remarried, her second husband can issue a warning to her with regard to the same man. If she enters into privacy with him, her husband can make her drink [the bitter water], because he is her second husband. Even if a hundred men married this woman one after the other, they can all have her drink [the bitter water] because of this same man.
Halacha 14
[The following laws apply if] a woman was warned by her husband and then entered into privacy [with the man in question] after the warning, thus causing her to be required to drink [the bitter water]. If [even] one witness comes and states that she engaged in sexual relations with the man regarding whom she was warned in his presence, the woman is forbidden to her husband forever. She may not drink [the bitter water],19 and must be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah. This applies even if the witness who testifies concerning her adultery is also one of the witnesses who testifies that she entered into privacy with [the man regarding whom she was warned].20
[This ruling is derived from Numbers 5:13]: "There is no witness against her."21
Halacha 15
Even a woman, a servant, a maid-servant or someone disqualified from testifying because of [the transgression of] a Rabbinic prohibition, and even a relative,22 may testify with regard to a woman suspected of infidelity, saying that she committed adultery. This causes her to be forbidden to her husband forever, to be prevented from drinking [the bitter water] and to be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.
[The rationale is] that since the Torah accepts the testimony of one witness with regard to [the woman's] adultery [we see that the formal laws of testimony do not apply]. Therefore, anyone's testimony is accepted with regard to this matter.
Even the five women who we assume hate each other23 can offer testimony regarding each other,24 saying that they committed adultery [in these circumstances]. Their testimony is accepted with regard to causing her to be forbidden to her husband and not [to compel her] to drink [the bitter water]. It is not a sufficient basis to cause her to forfeit [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah. Instead, she collects [the money due her by virtue of] herketubah and leaves [his household].25
Halacha 16
If one acceptable witness comes and says that the woman committed adultery, she is not required to drink [the bitter water], as we stated. If another witness comes and contradicts his testimony, saying: "She did not commit adultery," the statements [of the second witness] are disregarded.26
[The rationale is] with regard to a sotah, [the testimony of] one witness is considered equivalent to [that of] two [witnesses in ordinary matters]. Thus, the testimony of the second witness cannot nullify the testimony of the first witness, which is considered to be equivalent to [that of] two witnesses.27
Halacha 17
Halacha 18
When one acceptable witness and many women or unacceptable witnesses come at the same time, and the acceptable witness says that the woman committed adultery, while the women or the unacceptable witnesses say that she did not, she is required to drink [the bitter water].31 [The rationale is that the testimony of] one acceptable witness and [that of] many unacceptable witnesses are considered to be of equal weight.
Halacha 19
If all the witnesses are unacceptable, the ruling depends on the majority.
What is implied? If two women say she committed adultery, and three say she did not, she must drink [the bitter water]. If three say she did not commit adultery and four say that she did, she is not required to drink. If an equal number of women espouse each position, she must drink [the waters].32
Halacha 20
In all instances that we said that a sotah should not drink [the waters] because of testimony that she committed adultery, she is forbidden to her husband forever and must be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, for she was forbidden because [she received a] warning and entered into privacy [with the said man]. And she is prevented from drinking the waters, [which could] cause her [to be] permitted, because of the presence of the witness, as we explained.33
FOOTNOTES
1.
קנא usually has the connotation of jealousy. There are, however, instances where it has the meaning "warning," as in Joel 2:18.
2.
The intent in all these examples is that it is unlikely that the woman would engage in adultery with such a man: the father and the brother because of the family connection, the gentile or the servant because we assume that a modest Jewish woman would not associate with such people, and the impotent man because of his physical condition. By citing such examples, the Rambam implies that surely such a warning can be given with regard to any ordinary man.
3.
These can be the same two witnesses in whose presence the warning was administered (Hilchot Edut 21:5).
4.
We suspect that she committed adultery.
5.
As stated in Hilchot Gerushin 11:14, a woman who commits adultery is forbidden to her husband. Since we suspect that this woman committed adultery, she is forbidden until her faithfulness is proven.
6.
For it is her immodest behavior that caused her to become forbidden (Hilchot Ishut24:24).
7.
Even though in general a woman is allowed to enter into privacy with two men of established moral standing, in this instance, since the husband expressed his disapproval, such an act warrants drinking the bitter water.
8.
Entering into privacy (yichud) with another man is forbidden (Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, ch. 22). Nevertheless, Kiddushin 81a states that as long as a warning was not given, such an act is not sufficient cause for a woman to be forbidden to her husband.
9.
Implied is that the warning is effective after a boy reaches the age of nine, for from the age of nine a boy is fit to engage in sexual relations, as explained in Hilchot Ishut 11:3. Rav Ovadiah of Bertinoro (Sotah 4:4) differs and maintains that a youth must attain majority before a warning is effective. There are several Midrashic sources for the Rambam's ruling.
10.
And she must drink the bitter water.
The rationale for this ruling is that as long as the woman has not entered into privacy with the other man, the husband's warning has not been reinforced by her conduct. Accordingly, since he has authority over his warning, he can withdraw it. When, however, she has already entered into privacy with the other man, she is already required by the Torah to drink the bitter water. Her husband has no authority over the Torah's requirement, and thus, he can no longer withdraw his warning (Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV). See also the gloss of the Tzafnat Paneach to this halachah.
11.
In this instance, the husband is required to pay his wife the money due her by virtue of her ketubah because, although he is bound by the evidence of his own eyes, it is not sufficient to require his wife to drink the bitter water. For that, the testimony of two witnesses is necessary.
12.
The Rambam is speaking about an instance when, despite the gossip generated about the woman, there is no (or only one) witness who can testify about her entering into privacy with the man involved. Hence, because of her immodest conduct, he must divorce her. He must, however, pay the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, because, as stated in Sotah 6b, the bitter water will not test the chastity of a woman whose immodest conduct has become public knowledge.
13.
Since the testimony of one witness is not sufficient to require her to drink the bitter water, and yet the husband relies on the testimony of the witness, she is forbidden to the husband, but he must bear the financial burden of the prohibition. (See Hilchot Ishut24:17.)
14.
For a woman does not become forbidden until two witnesses testify that she entered into privacy with the man in question.
15.
For that is possible only when a warning was administered by the husband, as stated in the following halachah.
16.
Since the men in question are incapable of acting on their own, the court takes the initiative on their behalf. The court's action has two objectives: to maintain the moral standard of the Jewish people, and if that fails, to protect the husband's interest and cause a woman who acts immodestly to pay the penalty for her conduct.
17.
From the commentaries, it appears that he is required to do so; he does not have an option.
18.
In this instance as well, entering into privacy with the man is considered an immodest act, sufficient cause for the woman to forfeit the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
19.
Even if she desires to in an attempt to prove her innocence.
20.
If, however, the other witness who saw the man and the woman enter into privacy says that they did not engage in relations, the woman does not forfeit the money due her by virtue of her ketubah (Beit Shmuel178:12).
21.
Implied is that even if there is one witness, she is not to be tested by the bitter water. Generally, the Torah requires two witnesses for all matters involving marital law (Sotah31b). In this case, an exception was made because the fact that a warning was issued and disobeyed is an indication of immodesty.
22.
All the individuals mentioned are normally not accepted as witnesses. Nevertheless, an exception is made in this instance, as the Rambam explains. The testimony of witnesses who have violated prohibitions of Scriptural origin is not accepted, because we suspect that they will lie.
23.
As stated in Hilchot Gerushin 12:16, these women are the woman's mother-in-law, her mother-in-law's daughter, her husband's other wife, her yevamah and her husband's daughter from another marriage.
24.
The Rambam's wording refers to the following concept. Generally, because of the bad feelings that characterize the relationship between these pairs, testimony is also disqualified in the reverse of the above situations. For example, if the husband of the daughter of a woman's husband is missing, the woman may not testify about the matter, although she has no natural reason to hate the other woman.
25.
The testimony of these women is accepted because through it, the woman is granted the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. We assume that these women would desire to discredit her entirely and cause her to forfeit this money. Since without their testimony, the woman is forbidden to her husband until she drinks the bitter water and forfeits the money due her by virtue of herketubah, their testimony abets her position rather than harms it. (Indeed, note the gloss of Rabbi Akiva Eiger, who questions why the testimony of these women is accepted at all.)
26.
In most instances, when the statements of one witness are countered by the statements of another, the two are considered to be of equal weight, and thus the statements of the first witness are no longer considered.
27.
This principle applies not only with regard to a sotah, but with regard to all instances in which one witness's testimony is considered equivalent to that of two witnesses (Sotah31b) - e.g., testimony regarding the death of a woman's husband (Hilchot Gerushin12:18).
28.
I.e., one testified directly after the other.
29.
Since the testimony of the first witness was never established, it is not given more weight than it would ordinarily. Since the woman's fidelity is in doubt, she is required to drink the bitter water. The principles in this and the following halachot are paralleled inHilchot Gerushin, Chapter 12.
30.
In this instance, the testimony of the pair of witnesses balances the testimony of the witness who said that she committed adultery, even if that witness's testimony had already been established in court.
31.
Compare to Hilchot Rotzeach USh'mirat HaNefesh 9:16.
32.
Since the woman's fidelity remains in doubt, she must drink the waters to clarify the situation.
33.
See Halachah 14.
Sotah - Chapter Two
Halacha 1
When a woman is given a warning and enters into privacy [with the man in question], she is not compelled to drink the bitter water. Instead, if she says, "I committed adultery," she is not required to drink the waters, but she must be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, and she is forbidden to her husband forever.
Similarly, if she says: "I did not commit adultery, but I will not drink the waters,"1 she is not forced to drink, but she must be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.
And if her husband says, "I don't want to have her drink," or if he engaged in relations with her after she entered into privacy [with the man in question], she should not drink [the bitter water].2 Instead, she is given [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah3 and departs; she is forbidden to him forever.
Halacha 2
The following women are not fit to drink [the bitter water] even though they desire to drink, and their husbands desire to have them drink. Instead, once witnesses testify that [such women] entered into privacy with the men in question after witnesses testify that a warning was granted, they are forbidden to their husbands and must be divorced without receiving [the money due them by virtue of] their ketubah. There are fifteen such women; they are:
a woman who was consecrated but the marriage bond was not consummated,
a yevamah who is waiting for her husband's brother to perform yibbum,4
a minor married to a man past the age of majority,
a woman who is past majority who is married to a minor,
the wife of an androgynous,5
the wife of a blind man,
the wife of a man who limps,
who cannot speak, who is deaf, or whose hand has been cut off, and
similarly, a woman who limps, who cannot speak, who is blind, whose hand has been cut off, or who is deaf.
All the above are not fit to drink [the bitter water].6
Halacha 3
What are the sources that exclude these women from drinking [the bitter water]? [Numbers 5:29] states: "When a woman deviates [from the paths of modesty] while married to her husband...."
"While married" excludes a woman who was consecrated, but the marriage bond was not consummated, and a yevamah who is waiting for her husband's brother to perform yibbum. "Her husband" excludes a minor married to a man past the age of majority.7 "While married to her husband" excludes a woman who is past majority who is married to a minor8, and the wife of anandrogynous, for he is not a man.9
[Numbers 5:13 states:] "And it was hidden from the eyes of her husband" - This excludes the wife of a blind man.10 "And the priest shall have the woman stand" [Ibid.:18] - This excludes a woman who limps. "And he shall place on her palm" [Ibid.] - This excludes a woman who does not have a hand or whose hand is crooked or shrunk to the extent that she cannot hold [the meal offering]. This applies even if only one hand is in this condition, for the verse uses the plural form of the word palm, [indicating that both hands must be fit to perform this act].
"And the woman shall say" [Ibid.:22] - This excludes a woman who cannot speak. "And he shall say to the woman" [Ibid.:19] - This excludes a woman who cannot hear. And [the passage continues, Ibid.:20:] "When a woman deviates [from the path of modesty] while married to her husband..." - This indicates that she must be of sound body, possessing all the physical characteristics [mentioned previously] that he possesses, and he [must possess the characteristics mentioned that she possesses].
This teaches that any physical factor that prevents her from drinking [the bitter water] prevents her husband from compelling her to drink. And any factor that prevents her husband from compelling her to drink prevents her from drinking.
Halacha 4
When a minor is married off by her father, she is forbidden to her husband if she willingly commits adultery. Therefore, she is given a warning, not to compel her to drink [the bitter water], but so that she will be denied [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, as stated above.11
Halacha 5
When a man issues a warning to a woman he consecrated or to his yevamah, and she entered into privacy [with the man in question] after [the husband] consummated their marriage, she must drink [the bitter water] like any other [married] woman.14
When a husband issued a warning to his wife and she enters into privacy [with the man in question] before her husband engaged in sexual relations with her,15 she does not drink [the bitter water]. Instead, she is divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah and is forbidden to her husband forever. [This is alluded to by Numbers 5:20, which] states: "And another man has lain with you other than your husband," [implied is] that relations with the husband preceded relations with the man in question.
Halacha 6
[The following women are judged] like all other married women - who are permitted to remain married - and are required to drink [the bitter water if they violated a husband's warning]: a convert, a freed maidservant, the wife of a convert, the wife of a freed servant, a woman who is of illegitimate parenthood, the wife of a man of illegitimate parenthood and the wife of an impotent man - whether he became impotent naturally or through an act of man.16
Halacha 7
A pregnant woman and a nursing woman are required to drink [the bitter water] in their present state.17 When a woman is required to drink [the bitter water], but her husband dies before she has the opportunity of doing so, she should neither drink18 nor collect [the money due her by virtue of] herketubah.19
Halacha 8
Whenever a man has engaged in forbidden relations from the time he attained majority onward, the curse-bearing waters20 do not test [the fidelity of] his wife. Even if he engaged in relations with the woman he consecrated while she was living in her father's house - which is a Rabbinic prohibition21 - the waters do not test [the fidelity of] his wife. [This is derived from Numbers 5:31, which] states: "The man will then be free of sin, and the woman will bear [the burden of] her sin." [Implied is that] when the man is "free of sin," "the woman will bear [the burden of] her sin."
Halacha 9
Therefore, if a man's wife is forbidden to him because of a negative commandment, a positive commandment, or even [a Rabbinic prohibition - e.g.,] a sh'niyah, and he warned her and she entered into privacy [with the man in question], she should not drink [the bitter water].22 Instead, she should be divorced and should not receive [the money due her by virtue of] herketubah. She becomes forbidden to him for this reason as well.
When a man transgresses and marries a woman who was made pregnant by another man, or who is nursing a child she bore by another man, she may [be compelled to] drink [the bitter water], since there is no transgression involved [in their relationship].23
Halacha 10
When a man is not married to a woman capable of bearing children, nor has he [fathered] children in [a previous marriage], and he marries a barren woman, a woman past the age of child-bearing or an aylonit, [the marriage is not considered desirable in the eyes of the Sages].24 [Therefore,] such a woman may not drink [the bitter water], nor does she receive [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah [if the husband divorces her for violating his warning].
If, however, [the husband] has [already fathered] children, or he has another wife capable of bearing children, he may compel [his other wife] to drink [the bitter water] even if she is past the age of child-bearing, barren or an aylonit, and thus incapable of giving birth.25 For the Torah's statement, [Numbers 5:28] "And she will be cleared and she will conceive" applies solely to a woman capable of giving birth,26 [implying] that if previously she would give birth in pain, she will give birth comfortably; if previously she would give birth to daughters, she will give birth to sons.
Halacha 11
If [a husband] had [another] wife [capable of bearing children] or had children, but they died between the time when the warning was issued and the time the woman entered into privacy [with the man in question], the woman was already fit to drink the bitter water, and she should be compelled to drink.
If [a husband] did not have children or [another] wife capable of bearing children aside from an aylonit or another woman [incapable of bearing children], and his divorcee bore him a son27 between the time when the warning was issued and the time the woman entered into privacy [with the man in question], the aylonit was already excluded from drinking [and that ruling remains].
Halacha 12
Whenever a warning was administered to a woman and she entered into privacy [with the man in question], but did not drink the bitter water - whether her husband did not desire to compel her to drink, she did not want to drink, a witness testified that she committed adultery, she was one of the women who are unfit to drink [the bitter water],28 or the warning was administered by the court [and not by her husband]29 - since she becomes forbidden to her husband, she also becomes forbidden to the man with whom she entered into privacy just as she is forbidden to her husband.30
If this other man transgresses and marries her, he is compelled to divorce her even if she has borne him many children. Based on the Oral Tradition our Sages taught: Just as she is forbidden to her husband, she is forbidden to the man with whom she engaged in relations.31
Halacha 13
[Different rules apply when,] however, a woman was not warned and witnesses came and testified that she entered into privacy with a man, and then they discovered unsavory behavior: e.g., they entered [her room] after [the man in question did] and saw her tying her belt, they found wet spittle on the bed's canopy,32 or the like. If her husband divorces her because of this unsavory behavior,33 she should not marry the man with whom she is suspected [of having relations]; instead, she should be forbidden to him.
If she transgresses and marries [this man] and children are born to them, she need not be divorced.34 If she has not borne [this man] children, he must divorce her.
Halacha 14
When does the above apply? When [the inhabitants of] a city gossiped about the man and woman in question for a day and a half or more, saying: "So and so committed adultery with so and so," and this rumor did not cease. [Moreover, this applies] only when neither [the man nor the woman in question] have enemies who spread this rumor.35
If, however, the rumor was not widespread throughout the city, or the rumor ceased for reasons other than fear [different rules apply]. If she marries [the man in question], she need not be divorced although she has not borne him any children. Even when one witness comes and testifies that she committed adultery with him, she need not be divorced.36
Halacha 15
If a woman who was divorced by her [first] husband for unsavory behavior marries another man and is later divorced by him, she is forbidden to marry the man because of whom she was divorced by her first husband. If, however, she marries him, he is not compelled to divorce her even though she has not borne him children.37
Halacha 16
Whenever two witnesses testify that, while she was married to another man, a woman committed adultery38 with the man to whom she is presently married, she must be divorced by her present husband even though she has borne him several children.
In all the instances where we said that a woman must be divorced, she is not entitled to receive [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.39
FOOTNOTES
1.
Although she claims innocence, she is still afraid of drinking the waters. See Chapter 4, Halachah 3.
2.
As stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 2, from the time the woman enters into privacy with the man in question, her husband is forbidden to enter into relations with her. As such, if they engaged in relations, the bitter water will not show her guilt, as indicated by Halachah 8.
3.
Because it is her husband's actions that prevent her from drinking the waters that can establish her innocence, he must bear the financial responsibility.
4.
The commentaries raise a question based on Hilchot Yibbum 2:20, which states that when a yevamah engages in relations with another man, she does not become forbidden to her yavam. They explain that an exception is made when the yavam issues a warning and forbids the yevamah to enter into privacy with a particular man.
5.
A person who has both male and female sexual organs.
6.
If they violate a warning given by their husbands and enter into privacy with the man in question, they are to be divorced without receiving the money due them by virtue of their ketubah.
7.
When a girl below majority was not consecrated by her father, the consecration is not effective by Scriptural law. Even when she was consecrated by her father, she is not required to drink the bitter water unless she is warned after attaining majority. (See Halachah 4.) Note the Kessef Mishneh, who quotes a different source from that mentioned by the Rambam.
8.
A woman consecrated by a minor is not considered consecrated at all (Hilchot Ishut4:7).
9.
As stated in Hilchot Ishut 4;11, when anandrogynous consecrates a woman, the status of the kiddushin is in doubt.
10.
Who could not see, even when the two did not act in secrecy (Sotah 27a).
11.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, maintaining that a minor is never forbidden to her husband because of adultery unless he is a priest, basing his opinion on Yevamot 33b, which states: "The seduction of a minor is always considered equivalent to rape."
In his gloss on Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 3:2, theMaggid Mishneh substantiates the Rambam's ruling, citing Ketubot 9a, which states that the statements of a husband who claims that his wife is not a virgin are accepted and cause her to be forbidden to him. According to the Rambam, this applies even when the girl is a minor. (See also theKessef Mishneh.)
12.
I.e., an orphan who was married off by someone other than her father. See Hilchot Ishut 4:8; Hilchot Gerushin 11:1.
13.
Since according to Scriptural law, her marriage is not binding, relations with another man are not considered adulterous. Even a priest who may not marry a woman who engaged in a forbidden sexual relationship may remain married to this girl.
14.
Although these women are not required to drink if they enter into privacy with the man in question before the marriage is consummated, after its consummation the warning issued beforehand is effective.
15.
I.e., the husband and the wife entered into achuppah, effecting the stage of nisu'in. They did not, however, consummate the marriage. Before they did so, the wife entered into privacy with the man in question.
16.
The words "who are permitted to remain married" are fundamental to the understanding of this halachah. All these women and/or their husbands mentioned are bound by different laws with regard to marriage from the Jewish people as a whole. Nevertheless, if they are permitted to their husbands or to their wives, the laws of asotah apply.
As such, an illegitimate man or woman must be married either to another illegitimate man or woman or to a convert, as stated inHilchot Issurei Bi'ah, Chapter 15. With regard to an impotent man, the laws regarding whom he is permitted to marry and whom he is forbidden to marry are stated in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, Chapter 16.
17.
We do not wait for her to give birth or for her to wean her child. Note Tosafot, Sotah 26a, who differ and maintain that we should wait for a pregnant woman to give birth before requiring her to drink.
18.
For her husband is no longer alive.
19.
For she did not prove her innocence by drinking the waters.
20.
The term is taken from Numbers 5:18.
21.
See Hilchot Ishut 10:1. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam regarding this point, maintaining that Sotah 24b appears to indicate that the wife of a man who had relations with the woman he consecrated while she was living in her father's house must still drink the bitter water. The Kessef Mishneh justifies the Rambam's ruling.
22.
For by engaging in relations with his wife, the man has transgressed a prohibition, and hence the waters will not test his wife's fidelity.
23.
It is forbidden to marry such women, as stated in Hilchot Gerushin 11:25. Nevertheless, since the prohibition is not inherent to the couple's relationship - as reflected in the fact that after the 24 months of nursing have passed, the couple may marry - but rather a result of the child's presence, it is not considered a sinful relationship. See the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh and the Mishneh LaMelech.
The Rambam's wording here implies that the faithfulness of the sotah should be tested immediately. From his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sotah 4:3), it would appear that the couple are compelled to separate until the 24 months pass. Afterwards, if the husband desires to resume his relationship with his wife, she must drink the bitter water.
24.
Every Jew is commanded to be fruitful and multiply. For this reason, as the Rambam states in Hilchot Ishut 15:7, the husband is obligated to divorce this woman. Therefore, she is not given the opportunity to demonstrate her fidelity by drinking the bitter water.
25.
Significantly, the Rambam's ruling here reflects a change of mind from his ruling in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Sotah 4:3) where he rules that such women may not drink the bitter water even when the husband has fathered children already.
26.
It is not, however, an exclusion preventing a woman who is not capable of bearing children from drinking the waters. See Sotah25b. See the gloss of the Ra'avad.
27.
I.e., he was married to an aylonit and a woman capable of bearing children. The woman capable of bearing children became pregnant, he divorced her and then issued a warning to the aylonit.
28.
See Halachah 2.
29.
See Chapter 1, Halachot 10-11.
30.
I.e., if her husband divorces her, it is forbidden for her to marry the man concerning whom she was warned.
31.
This principle applies not only with regard to a sotah, but with regard to every adulterous relationship. The passage in the Torah mentions the word v'nitma'ah ("and she became defiled") twice, once in reference to the husband and once in reference to the adulterer. See Hilchot Gerushin 5:4-5. See also Halachah 15.
32.
This indicates that someone was lying face up on the bed and could not turn to either side (Rashi, Yevamot 24a). See Hilchot Ishut 24:15 and notes, where these concepts are discussed in greater detail.
33.
He is not, however, compelled to divorce her. The matter is left to his initiative (Kessef Mishneh; Beit Shmuel 11:6).
34.
Since there is no conclusive evidence that she is forbidden, she is allowed to remain married, so that the reputation of her children will not be sullied.
35.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 11:1) differs and maintains that if there are both a rumor that continues spreading throughout the city, and witnesses who saw unsavory behavior, the husband is required to divorce his wife if she has not borne him children [Shulchan Aruch(Even HaEzer 11:2)].
36.
If, however, two witnesses testify to adultery, the adulterer is compelled to divorce her, as stated above.
37.
Although the couple are forbidden to marry, since there were no witnesses to the act of adultery, and the second marriage interposed, a more lenient ruling is given than that stated in Halachah 13.
38.
The Chelkat Mechokek 11:10 emphasizes that this law applies only when the woman willingly committed adultery. If she was raped while married to her first husband, she does not become forbidden to him. Moreover, she also does not become forbidden to the rapist, and if she is widowed or divorced, she is permitted to marry him.
39.
For it is her immodest conduct that caused her to be forbidden.
Sotah - Chapter Three
Halacha 1
What is the process through which a sotah is compelled to drink the bitter water? First the husband comes to the court in his city and tells them: "I warned my wife [not to enter into privacy] with so and so, and she entered into privacy with him. These are the witnesses who will confirm my statements. She claims not to have committed adultery. I desire to have her drink the bitter water to verify this matter."
The court then listens to the testimony of the witnesses. [If it is substantial,] they provide [the husband] with two sages1 to watch over him, lest he engage in relations with her before she drinks the bitter water, for she is prohibited to him until that time,2 and he is sent to Jerusalem. For a sotah is compelled to drink [the bitter water] only by the Supreme Court of 70 elders,3 who [hold session] in the Temple.4
Halacha 2
When they arrive in Jerusalem, the High Court has her sit in its presence while her husband is not present,5 and they alarm her, frighten her and bring upon her great dread so that she will not [desire to] drink [the bitter water.6
They tell her: "My daughter, [we know] that wine has a powerful influence, frivolity has a powerful influence, immaturity has a powerful influence, bad neighbors have a powerful influence.7 Do not cause [God's] great name, which is written in holiness, to be blotted out in the water."
And they tell her: "There are many who preceded you and were swept away [from the world].8 Men of greater and more honorable stature have been overcome by their natural inclination and have faltered." [To emphasize this,] they tell her the story of Judah and Tamar, his daughter-in-law,9 the simple meaning of the episode concerning Reuben and [Bilhah], his father's concubine,10 and the story of Amnon and his sister,11 to make it easier for her to admit [her guilt].12
If she says: "I committed adultery," or "I will not drink [the water],"13 she is to be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, and the matter is dismissed.
Halacha 3
If she persists in he claim of innocence, she is brought to the eastern gate of the Temple Courtyard, which faces the Holy of Holies.14 She should be taken from place to place [in the Temple Courtyard] and made to walk around it so that she will become tired and her spirits will sap [with the intent that perhaps] she will admit [her guilt].
Halacha 4
If she persists in her claim, she is brought outside the eastern gate and made to stand there. If she usually dresses in white, she should dress in black. If black garments make her look attractive, she should dress in clothes that do not make her attractive. All silver and gold jewelry should be removed from her.
Halacha 5
Many women are gathered [to see] her, for all the women present [on the Temple Mount] are obligated to observe her, [as implied by Ezekiel 23:48]: "So that all women will be taught not to follow their lewdness." Any man who wants to observe her may do so.15
She stands among [the women] without a cloak or a veil, wearing only her clothes and a cap, as a woman dresses within her home.16
Halacha 6
Neither her servants nor her maidservants are allowed to be there, because [when] she recognizes them, her spirits will be fortified.17
Halacha 7
Afterwards, the priest administers an oath to her in a language that she understands.18 He tells her in her language that [she is being subjected to this test] because of the warning that her husband gave her, [which she violated by] entering into privacy [with the man in question].
He repeats for her in a language that she understands [the Biblical passage,Numbers 5:19-23]: "If a man has not lain with you, and you have not committed adultery, so as to be defiled to your husband, you shall be unharmed by this curse-bearing bitter water. But if you have committed adultery and you have become defiled, because a man other than your husband has lain with you... God will make you into a curse and into an oath among your people, causing your thigh to rupture and your belly to swell. This curse-bearing water will enter your body, causing your belly to swell and your thigh to rupture." [This serves as an oath]. She responds: "Amen, Amen,"19 in a language she understands.
He tells her that her belly will be affected first and afterwards, her thigh so as not to tarnish the reputation of the water.20
Halacha 8
Halacha 9
Halacha 10
[In the Sanctuary,] there was a place, one cubit by one cubit, at the right as one entered, [covered by] a marble tile with a ring affixed to it.30 [The priest] would lift the tile and take "from the dust... on the earth of the Tabernacle" [Numbers 5:17] and place it in the water, so that it could be seen [floating] on the water.
Into this mixture is also placed a bitter substance, wormwood or the like, as implied by [ibid.:18], which refers to "the bitter water."
He [then] dissolves [the writing of] the scroll in [the water], doing this for the sake of [the woman being tested]. He must dissolve [the writing] carefully, so that no trace of it remains on the scroll.
Halacha 11
Halacha 12
Halacha 13
Afterwards, the meal offering is taken from the basket and placed in a sacred vessel.41 Neither oil nor frankincense should be placed upon it.42 If [these substances] are placed upon it, [the priest] should be lashed for [placing] both the oil and the frankincense individually,43 as [implied by Numbers 5:15]: "He shall not pour oil on it, nor place frankincense on it."
Halacha 14
Throughout the time the priest uncovers the woman's hair and places theisaron [of meal] on her hand, the priest should hold the vessel containing the water in his hand and show it to the woman,44 as [implied by Numbers 5:18]: "The bitter, curse-bearing waters shall be in the hand of the priest."
Halacha 15
Afterwards, he gives her [the water] to drink. After she drinks, he takes the sacred vessel containing the meal offering and places it on her hand. The priest then places his hand below her [hand] and waves the offering45 in [the portion of the Temple courtyard to] the east [of the altar], as is done with all other meal offerings.46
He should bring it to [each of the four compass directions] and up and down.47Afterwards, he brings the meal offering to the horn at the southwestern corner of the altar, as is done with other meal offerings brought by private individuals.48
He should take a fistful of the meal and offer it on the fire. The remainder [of the meal] should be eaten by the priests.49
Halacha 16
If the woman is guiltless, she may depart; she is permitted to her husband. If she committed adultery, her face will immediately turn pale yellow, her eyes will bulge forth, and her veins will surface.
Everyone immediately shouts, "Take her out [of the Women's Courtyard]! Take her out!" so that she does not have a menstrual emission [there],50 for women who are in a menstrual state make the Women's Courtyard impure.51
They take her out of the Women's Courtyard, where she was standing. Her belly swells first and then her thigh ruptures and she dies.
Halacha 17
When she dies, the adulterer because of whom she was compelled to drink will also die, wherever he is located. The same phenomena, the swelling of the belly and the rupture of the thigh, will also occur to him.
All the above applies provided her husband never engaged in forbidden sexual relations in his life. If, however, her husband ever engaged in forbidden relations, the [bitter] waters do not check [the fidelity of] his wife.
Halacha 18
If [a husband] transgressed and compelled his wife to drink [the bitter water], although he previously entered into a forbidden relationship, he adds further transgression to his sin. For he causes God's name [which is not] pronounced to be blotted out on the waters for no reason and defames the reputation of the waters [used to test] a sotah. For his wife will tell others that she committed adultery and that the [bitter] waters did not harm her, without knowing that it was her husband's deeds that prevented the waters from checking her [fidelity].
Halacha 19
Therefore, when the number of people who openly committed adultery increased in the Second Temple era, the Sanhedrin52 nullified the use of the bitter water, relying on the verse in the [prophetic] tradition, [Hoshea 4:14]: "I will not punish your daughters when they commit harlotry."
Halacha 20
When a sotah has merit because of Torah study53 - although she herself is not obligated to study the Torah54 - her merit prolongs [her life] and she does not die immediately. Instead, she continues to be weakened,55 and suffers severe illness until she dies after a year, two years or three years, according to her merit. [When she dies,] she dies with a swollen belly and ruptured limbs.
Halacha 21
When a sotah drinks the bitter water and does not die immediately, she is permitted to her husband, even if he is a priest.56 Even if illness begins to set in and her limbs become afflicted, as long as her belly does not swell or her thigh rupture, she is permitted.57
When, however, her belly begins to expand and her thigh begins to rupture, she is forbidden.58
Halacha 22
When a sotah who was innocent drinks [the bitter water], she becomes stronger and her face glows. If she was afflicted by sickness [that prevented her from conceiving],59 it will disappear; she will conceive and give birth to a male. If she previously had difficulty giving birth, she will give birth speedily. If she would give birth to girls, she will give birth to males.
Halacha 23
If witnesses who say that she committed adultery come after she drinks the bitter water, she should be divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, and she is forbidden to her husband.
This applies even when none [of the negative consequences] mentioned above occur to her. For the [bitter] waters will check only [the fidelity of a woman] concerning whom there are no witnesses who will testify to her sexual misconduct.60 Moreover, it is possible that her husband is not guiltless, and it is because of him that the waters did not check his wife.61
If, however, one witness comes and testifies that a woman committed adultery, she is not forbidden [to] her husband and can remain married to him. For she drank [the bitter water].62
Halacha 24
When a woman was compelled to engage in adulterous relationships or did so unintentionally,63 or lay naked in the embrace of the man regarding whom she was warned, but did not engage in vaginal relations,64 [her fidelity] will not be checked by the [bitter] waters, as [implied by the following verses]. [Numbers 5:13 states:] "And she was not taken against her will," thus excluding a woman who was raped. [Ibid.:27 states:] "And she was unfaithful to her husband," excluding a woman who acted unintentionally." And [ibid.:13 states]: "And a man laid with her, [imparting] his seed," excluding an embrace without intercourse.
FOOTNOTES
1.
For they know that she is forbidden to him and will warn him against engaging in relations with her (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Sotah 1:3).
2.
And if he engages in relations with her, the bitter water will not test her fidelity, as reflected by Chapter 2, Halachah 5.
3.
This refers to the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish court. The obligation for a case involving a sotah to be tried before this body is derived from an association between this case and a rebellious elder (Sotah 7b).
4.
More precisely, the Sanhedrin would hold session in the Chamber of Hewn Stone, which was located half within the Temple Courtyard and half outside the Temple Courtyard.
Note the responsum of the Chida, Chayim Sha'al, (Volume II, section 4), which states that the High Court can try a sotah even when it does not hold session in the Temple Courtyard. Rather, according to his interpretation, the words "in the Temple" refer to the process of testing a sotah. Every aspect of the test is carried out in the Temple.
5.
Some commentaries explain that if her husband is present, she will be motivated to uphold her previous statements and will not admit her guilt. Others explain that if her husband is present, she might be embarrassed to admit that she committed adultery.
6.
And thus cause God's name to be blotted out.
7.
I.e., a candid admission of guilt is nothing to be ashamed of, because we understand the extenuating circumstances.
8.
I.e., you are not the first woman to have committed adultery. Many women have done so and they have been swept away from the world in punishment via the medium of the bitter water. Why follow in the same pattern? Admit your guilt.
9.
Genesis, Chapter 38. The Bible relates how Tamar dressed up like a prostitute and seduced Judah. The story is significant not only because it shows how a person can be lured into sexual misconduct, but it also relates how Judah was not embarrassed to admit his guilt publicly.
10.
Genesis 35:22 states that Reuben had relations with Bilhah, his father's concubine. According to Shabbat 55b, the verse is not meant to be interpreted literally, for actually he did not commit a sin of this nature. Nevertheless, to encourage the woman to admit her guilt, she is told the simple meaning of the narrative.
11.
II Samuel, Chapter 13, describes how Amnon, King David's firstborn, raped his half-sister Tamar.
12.
I.e., hearing the example of these distinguished individuals' conduct will motivate her to admit her own shortcomings.
13.
Although she does not admit her guilt explicitly, this statement is equivalent to an admission of guilt.
14.
This gate is referred to as the Gate of Nicanor.
15.
The presence of the onlookers serves two purposes: It embarrasses the woman being tested, and it spurs the onlookers themselves to higher moral practice.
16.
See Hilchot Ishut 13:11 and 24:12, which describe these garments.
17.
Seeing familiar faces will encourage her to persist in her position, rather than admit her guilt.
18.
Although the process that follows is a ritual, it is necessary that the woman understand the oath and her response to it, for the oath to be binding upon her. Therefore, there is no necessity for it to be administered in Biblical Hebrew; any language that the woman understands is sufficient.
19.
As the above passage concludes. Repeating Amen after an oath is equivalent to taking that oath oneself (Hilchot Sh'vuot2:1).
20.
Since the passage mentions both orders, the priest mentions that the order of retribution will be from the belly to the thigh, lest people say that the waters did not bring about the curse in the manner in which the Torah said they would (Sotah 9b).
21.
See Hilchot Tefillin 1:10. See Chapter 4, Halachah 8, which mentions several factors in which an equivalence is made between the scroll used for a sotah and a Torah scroll. As stated in that halachah, the equivalence is based on Numbers 5:23, which refers to the scroll used for a sotah as a sefer, the same term used for a Torah scroll.
The Jerusalem Talmud (Sotah 2:4) states that the parchment must be made from the hide of a kosher animal, lest the woman refuse to drink and the passage be required to be entombed. It would not be fitting for God's name to remain on parchment from a non-kosher animal.
22.
Originally, the passage would be copied from a Torah scroll. In the Second Temple era, Queen Heleni had fashioned a golden tablet with the words of this passage written on it (Yoma 37a).
23.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah, Gittin2:3, the Rambam defines this term with an Arabic word explained by Rav Kapach as referring to a green powder that when mixed with gallnut juice produces a black substance. Ink made with this substance cannot be rubbed out. See Chapter 4, Halachah 9.
24.
See Hilchot Gerushin, Chapter 3.
25.
The Zohar, Volume III, page 124b, interprets this as meaning that chronologically the first letter of God's name must be written first; the second, second; etc. Perhaps this is the Rambam's intent as well.
Alternatively, it is possible to explain that God's name is written with the letters י-ה-ו-ה, and not in another form.
26.
Sotah 9a states: She prepared wine for the adulterer in attractive goblets. As a consequence, the priest shall make her drink bitter water from a clay cup.
27.
Sotah 15b establishes an equivalence between the vessel that contains the water used for a sotah and the vessel that contains the water used to purify a person afflicted with tzara'at, a Biblical ailment somewhat like leprosy. And that vessel cannot have been used for any task previously (Hilchot Tum'at Tzara'at 11:1).
28.
172.8 cubic centimeters according to Shiurei Torah, 298.5 cubic centimeters according toChazon Ish.
29.
Numbers 5:17 states that "holy water must be taken." The Sifre interprets this as referring to "water that has been consecrated in a utensil, the water of the basin."
30.
The ring enables the tile to be lifted easily.
31.
Note the Kessef Mishneh, who questions the Rambam's source for the fact that the writing of the scroll would be dissolved before the woman's clothes were torn open.
32.
The Tosefta (Sotah 1:5) states that the priest would be chosen by a lottery. Chasdei David explains that a priest would be selected in this manner so that no one would think that one desired the task in order to view the woman's nakedness.
33.
This is cited by the Rabbis as proof that a Jewish woman's hair must always be covered. Otherwise, she is considered immodest. See Hilchot Ishut 24:11-12.
34.
I.e., a rope made of palm bast.
35.
As implied by Leviticus 18:3, the Egyptians were known for their immodest behavior. Thus, the imagery evoked by the rope also served to chastise the woman for her conduct (Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah 1:6).
36.
An isaron is considered the size of 43.2 eggs. According to modern measure, the size of an egg is considered to be 57.6 cubic centimeters according to Shiurei Torah and 99.5 cubic centimeters according to theChazon Ish.
37.
Sotah 15b notes that, in contrast to wheat, which is used as food for humans, barley is employed primarily as animal fodder. Since the woman acted like an animal, betraying her fidelity to her husband, the sacrifice she brings consists of grains used for beasts.
38.
I.e., a wicker basket made of palm leaves. The allusion to Egypt is intended to convey the same symbolism as above.
39.
See Hilchot Shekalim 2:4, which explains that this term refers to money collected from the half-shekalim donated by the entire Jewish people, which remains after the purchase of communal sacrifices. As stated in Hilchot Shekalim 4:8, these funds were used for various communal purposes.
40.
This is intended to motivate her to admit her guilt. Until the meal offering is sacrificed, she may admit her guilt and thus free herself of the obligation to drink the bitter water and suffer the severe penalty involved (Sotah14a).
41.
As befits a sacrificial offering.
42.
Note the commentary of Rashi on Numbers 5:15, which explains the rationale for these prohibitions. Adding frankincense and oil adorns the sacrifices, making them more attractive. More specifically, there are allegorical connotations to the above. Oil is a metaphor for light, and this woman acted in darkness. Frankincense is used as an allusion to the Matriarchs, who were the epitome of modesty, and this woman departed from their ways.
43.
I.e., each one is considered as a separate negative commandment. See Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 104-105) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvot 366-367).
44.
To frighten her and to encourage her to confess (Bemidbar Rabbah 9:33).
45.
The meal offering had to be waved by both the woman bringing it and the priest. The Jerusalem Talmud (Sotah 3:1) states that "the evil inclination does not operate at that time," and hence there is no danger that the physical contact will stir the priest to sexual desire.
46.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 9:6-7.
47.
Sukkah 37b interprets this as acknowledgement of God's dominion over the entire universe. Menachot 62a explains that this is a measure to check undesirable winds.
48.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 13:12, which describes the offering of meal offerings brought by private individuals.
49.
See Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 12:9, which describes the consumption of the meal offerings.
50.
Sotah 20b states that the terror of death might provoke menstruation.
51.
The Rambam's wording, based on that of the Mishnah (Sotah 3:3), requires some clarification. The intent appears to be, not that the Women's Courtyard becomes impure, but that the woman becomes impure, and in that state she is forbidden to be in the Women's Courtyard. See Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 3:3.
52.
Sotah 47a states that this took place in the time of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, shortly before the destruction of the Second Temple.
53.
Sotah 21a says that this refers to the woman's efforts in assisting her husband and her sons in their studies.
54.
See Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:1,13.
55.
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Sotah 3:3). Others render the term as "she deteriorates."
56.
Who is forbidden to engage in relations with a woman who took part in forbidden sexual relations.
57.
The Mishneh LaMelech (in the gloss on Halachah 24) explains that in this halachah, the Rambam's intent is that one might think that the fact that she becomes afflicted by sickness indicates that she was raped - i.e., the bitter water had an effect, but because she did not willfully engage in the transgression, she did not die. To negate this hypothesis, the Rambam states that even a priest is allowed to continue married life with such a woman.
58.
For this is a sign of adulterous relationships.
59.
The bracketed additions are based on the commentary of the Meiri.
60.
When there are witnesses, there is no need for the miraculous activity of the water. For ultimately the witnesses will testify in court and cause the woman to be forbidden to her husband (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Sotah 1:1).
61.
See Halachah 17.
62.
I.e., had the witness testified before she drank the bitter water, she would not have been allowed to drink them, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 14. Nevertheless, once she drank the waters, the testimony of one witness is not sufficient to cause her to be considered guilty.
63.
See Hilchot Ishut 24:20.
64.
See the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Yevamot 6:1) for a more specific definition of the Hebrew term derech evarim.
---------------------
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · 12 February 2016
Monday 3 Adar I 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: T'ruma, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 18-22.
Tanya: On the contrary (p. 117)...been explained earlier. (p. 117).
The Alter Rebbe said: The mitzva of ahavat yisrael1 extends to anyone born into the people of Israel, even if you have never met him. How much more so does it extend to every member - man or woman of the Jewish community where you live, who belongs to your own community.
FOOTNOTES
1. "Love of one's fellow." See Ahavat Yisrael Kehot; see below, 15 Kislev.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class• "Today's Day"
Friday, Adar I 3, 5776 · 12 February 2016
Monday 3 Adar I 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: T'ruma, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 18-22.
Tanya: On the contrary (p. 117)...been explained earlier. (p. 117).
The Alter Rebbe said: The mitzva of ahavat yisrael1 extends to anyone born into the people of Israel, even if you have never met him. How much more so does it extend to every member - man or woman of the Jewish community where you live, who belongs to your own community.
FOOTNOTES
1. "Love of one's fellow." See Ahavat Yisrael Kehot; see below, 15 Kislev.
---------------------
• Daily Thought:
Enter High
Never squeeze yourself into this place called “world” out of fear.
Enter each venture with your head high, as a soul with a lofty mission.
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment