Today in Jewish History:
• Sefarim victory (1987)Tevet 5 is celebrated as a day of rejoicing in the Chabad-Lubavitch community. On this date in 1987, U.S. Federal Court issued a decision in favor of Agudas Chassidei Chabad ("Union of Chabad Chassidim") regarding the ownership of the priceless library of the 6th Rebbe of Chabad-Lubavitch, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn. The ruling was based on the idea that a Rebbe is not a private individual but a communal figure synonymous with the body of Chassidim. The Lubavitcher Rebbe (Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak's son-in-law and successor) urged that the occasion be marked with time devoted to study from Torah books ("sefarim") as well as the acquisition of new Torah books.
Links:
Books with Souls
The Rebbe's Library
Chabad.org online library
• Sefarim victory (1987)Tevet 5 is celebrated as a day of rejoicing in the Chabad-Lubavitch community. On this date in 1987, U.S. Federal Court issued a decision in favor of Agudas Chassidei Chabad ("Union of Chabad Chassidim") regarding the ownership of the priceless library of the 6th Rebbe of Chabad-Lubavitch, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn. The ruling was based on the idea that a Rebbe is not a private individual but a communal figure synonymous with the body of Chassidim. The Lubavitcher Rebbe (Rabbi Yoseph Yitzchak's son-in-law and successor) urged that the occasion be marked with time devoted to study from Torah books ("sefarim") as well as the acquisition of new Torah books.
Links:
Books with Souls
The Rebbe's Library
Chabad.org online library
Daily Quote:
In every sorrow there is profit[Proverbs 14:23]
Today's Study:
In every sorrow there is profit[Proverbs 14:23]
Today's Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Parshat Vayigash, 3rd Portion (Genesis 45:8-45:27) with Rashi
• Genesis Chapter 45
8And now, you did not send me here, but God, and He made me a father to Pharaoh, a lord over all his household, and a ruler over the entire land of Egypt. חוְעַתָּ֗ה לֹֽא־אַתֶּ֞ם שְׁלַחְתֶּ֤ם אֹתִי֙ הֵ֔נָּה כִּ֖י הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים וַיְשִׂימֵ֨נִי לְאָ֜ב לְפַרְעֹ֗ה וּלְאָדוֹן֙ לְכָל־בֵּית֔וֹ וּמשֵׁ֖ל בְּכָל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם:
a father: A colleague and a protector. [From Gen. Rabbah 93:10] לאב: חבר ופטרון:
9Hasten and go up to my father, and say to him, 'So said your son, Joseph: "God has made me a lord over all the Egyptians. Come down to me, do not tarry. טמַֽהֲרוּ֘ וַֽעֲל֣וּ אֶל־אָבִי֒ וַֽאֲמַרְתֶּ֣ם אֵלָ֗יו כֹּ֤ה אָמַר֙ בִּנְךָ֣ יוֹסֵ֔ף שָׂמַ֧נִי אֱלֹהִ֛ים לְאָד֖וֹן לְכָל־מִצְרָ֑יִם רְדָ֥ה אֵלַ֖י אַל־תַּֽעֲמֹֽד:
and go up to my father: The land of Israel is higher than all [other] lands. [From Kidd. 69a, b] ועלו אל אבי: ארץ ישראל גבוה מכל הארצות:
10And you shall dwell in the land of Goshen, and you shall be near to me, you and your children and your grandchildren, and your flocks and your cattle and all that is yours. יוְיָֽשַׁבְתָּ֣ בְאֶֽרֶץ־גּ֗שֶׁן וְהָיִ֤יתָ קָרוֹב֙ אֵלַ֔י אַתָּ֕ה וּבָנֶ֖יךָ וּבְנֵ֣י בָנֶ֑יךָ וְצֹֽאנְךָ֥ וּבְקָֽרְךָ֖ וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ:
11And I will sustain you there for there are still five years of famine lest you become impoverished, you and your household and all that is yours." ' יאוְכִלְכַּלְתִּ֤י אֹֽתְךָ֙ שָׁ֔ם כִּי־ע֛וֹד חָמֵ֥שׁ שָׁנִ֖ים רָעָ֑ב פֶּן־תִּוָּרֵ֛שׁ אַתָּ֥ה וּבֵֽיתְךָ֖ וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ:
lest you become impoverished: Heb. פֶּן-תִּוָּרֵשׁ, [which Onkelos renders:] דָּלְמָא תִתְמַסְכַּן, lest you become impoverished, [which is] an expression similar to“impoverishes (מוֹרִישׁ) and makes rich” (I Sam. 2:7). פן תורש: דלמא תתמסכן, לשון (שמואל א' ב ז) מוריש ומעשיר:
12And behold, your eyes see, as well as the eyes of my brother Benjamin, that it is my mouth speaking to you. יבוְהִנֵּ֤ה עֵֽינֵיכֶם֙ רֹא֔וֹת וְעֵינֵ֖י אָחִ֣י בִנְיָמִ֑ין כִּי־פִ֖י הַֽמְדַבֵּ֥ר אֲלֵיכֶֽם:
And behold, your eyes see: my glory and that I am your brother, for I am circumcised like you, and moreover, that it is my mouth that is speaking to you in the holy tongue (Gen. Rabbah 93:10). והנה עיניכם רואות: בכבודי, ושאני אחיכם, שהרי אני מהול ככם. ועוד כי פי המדבר אליכם בלשון הקודש:
as well as the eyes of my brother Benjamin: He compared them all together, saying that“just as I harbor no hatred against my brother Benjamin, for he did not participate in selling me, neither do I have any hatred in my heart against you.” [from Meg. 16b] ועיני אחי בנימין: השוה את כולם יחד לומר שכשם שאין לי שנאה על בנימין אחי, שהרי לא היה במכירתי, כך אין בלבי שנאה עליכם:
13And you shall tell my father [of] all my honor in Egypt and all that you have seen, and you shall hasten and bring my father down here." יגוְהִגַּדְתֶּ֣ם לְאָבִ֗י אֶת־כָּל־כְּבוֹדִי֙ בְּמִצְרַ֔יִם וְאֵ֖ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר רְאִיתֶ֑ם וּמִֽהַרְתֶּ֛ם וְהֽוֹרַדְתֶּ֥ם אֶת־אָבִ֖י הֵֽנָּה:
14And he fell on his brother Benjamin's neck and wept, and Benjamin wept on his neck. ידוַיִּפֹּ֛ל עַל־צַוְּארֵ֥י בִנְיָֽמִן־אָחִ֖יו וַיֵּ֑בְךְּ וּבִ֨נְיָמִ֔ן בָּכָ֖ה עַל־צַוָּארָֽיו:
And he fell on his brother Benjamin’s neck and wept: for the two sanctuaries which were destined to be in Benjamin’s territory and would ultimately be destroyed. [From Meg. 16b] ויפול על צוארי בנימין אחיו ויבך: על שני מקדשות שעתידין להיות בחלקו של בנימין וסופן ליחרב:
and Benjamin wept on his neck: for the Tabernacle of Shiloh, which was destined to be in Joseph’s territory yet would ultimately be destroyed. [From Meg. 16b, Gen. Rabbah 93:12] ובנימין בכה על צואריו: על משכן שילה שעתיד להיות בחלקו של יוסף וסופו ליחרב:
15And he kissed all his brothers and wept over them, and afterwards his brothers spoke with him. טווַיְנַשֵּׁ֥ק לְכָל־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֵּ֣בְךְּ עֲלֵהֶ֑ם וְאַ֣חֲרֵי כֵ֔ן דִּבְּר֥וּ אֶחָ֖יו אִתּֽוֹ:
And he kissed: He continued to kiss וינשק: הוסיף בנשיקה, מנשק והולך. דיבייש"ר בלע"ז:
and afterwards: After they saw him weeping and that he was wholehearted with them. ואחרי כן: מאחר שראוהו בוכה ולבו שלם עמהם:
his brothers spoke with him: whereas previously they had felt shame before him. [From Tanchuma Vayigash 5] דברו אחיו אתו: שמתחלה היו בושים ממנו:
16And the voice was heard [in] Pharaoh's house, saying, "Joseph's brothers have come!" And it pleased Pharaoh and his servants. טזוְהַקֹּ֣ל נִשְׁמַ֗ע בֵּ֤ית פַּרְעֹה֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר בָּ֖אוּ אֲחֵ֣י יוֹסֵ֑ף וַיִּיטַב֙ בְּעֵינֵ֣י פַרְעֹ֔ה וּבְעֵינֵ֖י עֲבָדָֽיו:
And the voice was heard [in] Pharaoh’s house: Heb. בֵּית פַּרְעֹה, equivalent to בְּבֵית פַּרְעֹה, and this is an expression [denoting] an actual house. [From Targum Onkelos] והקול נשמע בית פרעה: כמו בבית פרעה, וזהו לשון בית ממש:
17And Pharaoh said to Joseph, "Tell your brothers, 'Do this load up your beasts and go, enter the land of Canaan. יזוַיֹּ֤אמֶר פַּרְעֹה֙ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֔ף אֱמֹ֥ר אֶל־אַחֶ֖יךָ זֹ֣את עֲשׂ֑וּ טַֽעֲנוּ֙ אֶת־בְּעִ֣ירְכֶ֔ם וּלְכוּ־בֹ֖אוּ אַ֥רְצָה כְּנָֽעַן:
load up your beasts: with grain. טענו את בעירכם: תבואה:
18And take your father and your households and come to me, and I will give you the best of the land of Egypt, and [you will] eat the fat of the land.' יחוּקְח֧וּ אֶת־אֲבִיכֶ֛ם וְאֶת־בָּֽתֵּיכֶ֖ם וּבֹ֣אוּ אֵלָ֑י וְאֶתְּנָ֣ה לָכֶ֗ם אֶת־טוּב֙ אֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם וְאִכְל֖וּ אֶת־חֵ֥לֶב הָאָֽרֶץ:
the best of the land of Egypt: [I.e.,] the land of Goshen. He prophesied but did not know what he was prophesying. They (the Israelites) would eventually make it (Egypt) like the depths of the sea, which have no fish. [From Avoth d’Rabbi Nathan, second version, ch. 43; Ber. 9b] את טוב ארץ מצרים: ארץ גושן. ניבא ואינו יודע מה ניבא, סופם לעשותה כמצולה שאין בה דגים:
the fat of the land: Heb. חֵלֶב הָאָרֶץ. Every [instance of] חֵלֶב is an expression meaning the best. [From Targum Onkelos] חלב הארץ: כל חלב לשון מיטב הוא:
19And you [Joseph] have been commanded [to tell them], 'Do this: take yourselves wagons from the land of Egypt for your young children and for your wives, and you shall carry your father and come. יטוְאַתָּ֥ה צֻוֵּ֖יתָה זֹ֣את עֲשׂ֑וּ קְחֽוּ־לָכֶם֩ מֵאֶ֨רֶץ מִצְרַ֜יִם עֲגָל֗וֹת לְטַפְּכֶם֙ וְלִנְשֵׁיכֶ֔ם וּנְשָׂאתֶ֥ם אֶת־אֲבִיכֶ֖ם וּבָאתֶֽם:
And you [Joseph] have been commanded: By me to say to them. [From Targum Jonathan] ואתה צויתה: מפי לומר להם:
Do this: So shall you say to them, that it is in my power [to provide for you]. זאת עשו: כך אמור להם שברשותי הוא:
20And let your eye not be concerned about your utensils, for the best of all the land of Egypt is yours.' " כוְעֵ֣ינְכֶ֔ם אַל־תָּחֹ֖ס עַל־כְּלֵיכֶ֑ם כִּי־ט֛וּב כָּל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם לָכֶ֥ם הֽוּא:
21And the sons of Israel did so, and Joseph gave them wagons by Pharaoh's orders, and he gave them provisions for the way. כאוַיַּֽעֲשׂוּ־כֵן֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיִּתֵּ֨ן לָהֶ֥ם יוֹסֵ֛ף עֲגָל֖וֹת עַל־פִּ֣י פַרְעֹ֑ה וַיִּתֵּ֥ן לָהֶ֛ם צֵדָ֖ה לַדָּֽרֶךְ:
22He gave them all, to each one [several] changes of clothes, and to Benjamin he gave three hundred [pieces of] silver and five changes of clothes. כבלְכֻלָּ֥ם נָתַ֛ן לָאִ֖ישׁ חֲלִפ֣וֹת שְׂמָלֹ֑ת וּלְבִנְיָמִ֤ן נָתַן֙ שְׁל֣שׁ מֵא֣וֹת כֶּ֔סֶף וְחָמֵ֖שׁ חֲלִפֹ֥ת שְׂמָלֹֽת:
23And to his father he sent the following: ten he donkeys carrying of the best of Egypt, and ten she donkeys carrying grain, bread, and [other] food, for his father for the way. כגוּלְאָבִ֞יו שָׁלַ֤ח כְּזֹאת֙ עֲשָׂרָ֣ה חֲמֹרִ֔ים נֹֽשְׂאִ֖ים מִטּ֣וּב מִצְרָ֑יִם וְעֶ֣שֶׂר אֲתֹנֹ֡ת נֹֽ֠שְׂאֹ֠ת בָּ֣ר וָלֶ֧חֶם וּמָז֛וֹן לְאָבִ֖יו לַדָּֽרֶךְ:
he sent the following: Heb. כְּזֹאת, lit., like this, [meaning:] according to this amount. And what is the amount? Ten he-donkeys, etc. שלח כזאת: כחשבון הזה. ומהו החשבון, עשרה חמורים וגו':
of the best of Egypt: We find in the Talmud (Meg. 16b) that he sent him aged wine because elderly people find contentment with it. [I.e., the fact that wine improves with age often affords contentment to the elderly.] According to the Midrash Aggadah (Gen. Rabbah 94:2 on verse 18), however, this refers to pounded beans [which have a soothing effect on a troubled spirit]. מטוב מצרים: מצינו בתלמוד ששלח לו יין (ישן) שדעת זקנים נוחה הימנו. ומדרש אגדה גריסין של פול:
grain, bread: As the Targum renders. בר ולחם: כתרגומו:
and [other] food: Things eaten with bread. ומזון: ליפתן:
24And he sent off his brothers, and they went, and he said to them, "Do not quarrel on the way." כדוַיְשַׁלַּ֥ח אֶת־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֵּלֵ֑כוּ וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אַל־תִּרְגְּז֖וּ בַּדָּֽרֶךְ:
Do not quarrel on the way: Heb. אַל-תִּרְגְזוּ בַּדָּרֶ. Do not engage in a halachic discussion lest the way cause you to stray. Another explanation: Do not walk with large steps, and enter the city while the sun is shining (Ta’anith 10b). According to the simple meaning of the verse, we can say that since they were ashamed, he (Joseph) was concerned that they would perhaps quarrel on the way about his being sold, debating with one another, and saying,“Because of you he was sold. You slandered him and caused us to hate him.” אל תרגזו בדרך: אל תתעסקו בדבר הלכה שלא תרגז עליכם הדרך. דבר אחר אל תפסיעו פסיעה גסה והכניסו חמה לעיר. ולפי פשוטו של מקרא יש לומר לפי שהיו נכלמים היה דואג שמא יריבו בדרך על דבר מכירתו להתווכח זה עם זה ולומר על ידך נמכר, אתה ספרת לשון הרע עליו וגרמת לנו לשנאתו:
25So they went up from Egypt, and they came to the land of Canaan, to their father, Jacob. כהוַיַּֽעֲל֖וּ מִמִּצְרָ֑יִם וַיָּבֹ֨אוּ֙ אֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן אֶל־יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב אֲבִיהֶֽם:
26And they told him, saying, "Joseph is still alive," and [they told him] that he ruled over the entire land of Egypt, and his heart changed, for he did not believe them. כווַיַּגִּ֨דוּ ל֜וֹ לֵאמֹ֗ר ע֚וֹד יוֹסֵ֣ף חַ֔י וְכִי־ה֥וּא משֵׁ֖ל בְּכָל־אֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם וַיָּ֣פָג לִבּ֔וֹ כִּ֥י לֹא־הֶֽאֱמִ֖ין לָהֶֽם:
and [they told him] that he ruled: Heb. וְכִי הוּא משֵׁל, and that he rules. וכי הוא מושל: ואשר הוא מושל:
and his heart changed: Heb. וַיָפָג לִבָּוֹ. His heart changed and went away from believing. His heart did not turn to [believe] these words. [וַיָפָג is] a term similar to“their taste changes” (מְפִיגִין טַעְמָן) in the language of the Mishnah (Bezah 14a), and“without respite (הֲפֻגוֹת)” (Lam. 3:49). Also“and its bouquet did not change” (Jer. 48: 11) is translated [into Aramaic] as וְרֵיחֵיה ָלֹא פָג. ויפג לבו: נחלף לבו והלך מלהאמין, לא היה לבו פונה אל הדברים, לשון מפיגין טעמן, בלשון משנה וכמו (איכה ג מט) מאין הפוגות, (ירמיה מח יא) וריחו לא נמר מתרגמינן וריחיה לא פג:
27And they told him all of Joseph's words that he had said to them, and he saw the wagons that Joseph had sent to carry him, and the spirit of their father Jacob was revived. כזוַיְדַבְּר֣וּ אֵלָ֗יו אֵ֣ת כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֤י יוֹסֵף֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר דִּבֶּ֣ר אֲלֵהֶ֔ם וַיַּרְא֙ אֶת־הָ֣עֲגָל֔וֹת אֲשֶׁר־שָׁלַ֥ח יוֹסֵ֖ף לָשֵׂ֣את אֹת֑וֹ וַתְּחִ֕י ר֖וּחַ יַֽעֲקֹ֥ב אֲבִיהֶֽם:
all of Joseph’s words: He (Joseph) gave them a sign, viz., in what topic he was engaged when he (Joseph) separated from him (Jacob). [That was] the section dealing with the heifer that was to be beheaded (עֶגְלָה עִרוּפָה) (Deut. 21), and this is what [Scripture] says, “and he saw the wagons that Joseph had sent,” and it (Scripture) does not say, “that Pharaoh had sent.” [from Gen. Rabbah 94:3] את כל דברי יוסף: סימן מסר להם במה היה עוסק כשפירש ממנו, בפרשת עגלה ערופה, זהו שאמר וירא את העגלות אשר שלח יוסף ולא אמר אשר שלח פרעה:
and the spirit of…Jacob was revived: The Shechinah, which had separated from him [because of his grief], rested upon him [once again]. [From Avoth d’Rabbi Nathan , ch. 30, Targum Onkelos , Targum Jonathan] ותחי רוח יעקב: שרתה עליו שכינה שפירשה ממנו:
• Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 29-34
• Chapter 29
The Name of God appears eighteen times in this psalm, corresponding to which our Sages established eighteen blessings-the Amidah. The entire psalm can be interpreted as referring to the giving of the Torah and the ingathering of the exiles.
1. A psalm by David. Render to the Lord, children of the mighty, render to the Lord honor and strength.
2. Render to the Lord the honor due to His Name; bow down to the Lord in resplendent holiness.
3. The voice of the Lord is over the waters, the God of glory thunders; the Lord is over mighty waters.
4. The voice of the Lord resounds with might; the voice of the Lord resounds with majesty.
5. The voice of the Lord breaks cedars; the Lord shatters the cedars of Lebanon.
6. He makes them leap like a calf, Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox.
7. The voice of the Lord strikes flames of fire.
8. The voice of the Lord makes the desert tremble; the Lord causes the desert of Kadesh to tremble.
9. The voice of the Lord causes the does to calve, and strips the forests bare; and in His Sanctuary all proclaim His glory.
10. The Lord sat [as King] at the Flood; the Lord will sit as King forever.
11. The Lord will give strength to His people; the Lord will bless His people with peace.
Chapter 30
This psalm teaches one not to be distressed if God visits suffering upon him in this world, for only through suffering can one enter the World to Come. Even one of great spiritual stature should realize that his stability is not guaranteed, but that all is in the hands of God.
1. A psalm, a song of dedication of the House, by David.
2. I exalt You, Lord, for You have uplifted me, and did not allow my enemies to rejoice over me.
3. Lord, my God, I cried out to You, and You healed me.
4. Lord, You have brought up my soul from the grave; You have kept me alive, that I should not descend to the pit.
5. Sing to the Lord, you His pious ones, and praise His holy Name.
6. For His wrath endures but for a moment, when He is conciliated there is [long] life; when one retires at night weeping, joy will come in the morning.
7. In my security I thought, "I shall never falter.”
8. Lord, by Your favor You have made my mountain stand strong; when You concealed Your countenance I was alarmed.
9. I called to You, O Lord, and I made supplication to my Lord:
10. What profit is there in my death, in my going down to the grave? Can dust praise You? Can it proclaim Your truth
11. Lord, hear and be gracious to me; Lord, be a help to me.
12. You have turned my mourning into dancing; You have undone my sackcloth and girded me with joy.
13. Therefore my soul shall sing to You, and not be silent; Lord my God, I will praise You forever.
Chapter 31
Composed by a destitute and oppressed David, running from Saul while placing his trust in God, this psalm instructs man to put his trust in God alone.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. In You I have taken shelter, O Lord, I shall never be shamed; rescue me in Your righteousness.
3. Turn Your ear to me, save me quickly; be to me a rock of refuge, a fortress to deliver me.
4. For You are my rock and my fortress; for the sake of Your Name, direct me and lead me.
5. Remove me from the net they planted for me, for You are my stronghold.
6. I entrust my spirit into Your hand; You will redeem me, Lord, God of truth.
7. I despise those who anticipate worthless vanities; but I trust in the Lord.
8. I will rejoice and delight in Your kindness, for You have seen my affliction; You know the troubles of my soul.
9. You have not delivered me into the hand of the enemy; You have set my feet on spacious ground.
10. Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I am in distress; my eye wastes away from vexation-my soul and my stomach.
11. For my life is spent in sorrow, my years in sighing; my strength fails because of my iniquity, and my bones are wasted away.
12. Because of my adversaries I have become a disgrace-exceedingly to my neighbors, and a dread to my friends; those who see me outside flee from me.
13. Like a dead man, I was forgotten from the heart; I became like a lost vessel.
14. For I have heard the slander of many, terror on every side, when they assembled together against me and plotted to take my life.
15. But I trusted in You, O Lord; I said, "You are my God.”
16. My times are in Your hand; save me from the hands of my enemies and pursuers.
17. Shine Your countenance upon Your servant; deliver me in Your kindness.
18. O Lord, let me not be ashamed, for I have called You; let the wicked be shamed, let them be silent to the grave.
19. Let the lips of falsehood-which speak insolently against the righteous, with arrogance and contempt-be struck dumb.
20. How abundant is Your good that You have hidden for those who fear You; in the presence of man, You have acted for those who take refuge in You.
21. Conceal them from the haughtiness of man, in the shelter of Your countenance; hide them in a shelter from the strife of tongues.
22. Blessed is the Lord, for He has been wondrous in His kindness to me in a besieged city.
23. I said in my panic, "I am cut off from before Your eyes!" But in truth, You heard the voice of my pleas when I cried to You.
24. Love the Lord, all His pious ones! The Lord preserves the faithful, and repays with exactness those who act haughtily.
25. Be strong and fortify your hearts, all who put their hope in the Lord!
Chapter 32
This psalm speaks of forgiveness of sin, and of the good fortune of one who repents and confesses to God wholeheartedly.
1. By David, a maskil.1Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
2. Fortunate is the man to whom the Lord does not reckon his sin, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.
3. When I was silent, my limbs wore away through my wailing all day long.
4. For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; my marrow became [dry] as the droughts of summer, Selah.
5. My sin I made known to You, my iniquity I did not cover. I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord," and You have forgiven the iniquity of my transgression forever.
6. For this let every pious man pray to You, at a time when You may be found; indeed, the flood of many waters will not reach him.
7. You are a refuge to me; protect me from distress; surround me with songs of deliverance forever.
8. I will enlighten you and educate you in the path you should go; I will advise you with what I have seen.
9. Be not like a horse, like a mule, senseless, that must be muzzled with bit and bridle when being adorned, so that it not come near you.
10. Many are the agonies of the wicked, but he who trusts in the Lord is surrounded by kindness.
11. Rejoice in the Lord and exult, you righteous ones! Sing joyously, all you upright of heart!
FOOTNOTES
1.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
Chapter 33
This psalm teaches the righteous and upright to praise God. For the more one knows of the Torah's wisdom, the more should he praise God, for he knows and understands His greatness.
1. Sing joyously to the Lord, you righteous ones; it is fitting for the upright to offer praise.
2. Extol the Lord with a harp; sing to Him with a ten-stringed lyre.
3. Sing to Him a new song; play well with sounds of jubilation.
4. For the word of the Lord is just; all His deeds are done in faithfulness.
5. He loves righteousness and justice; the kindness of the Lord fills the earth.
6. By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their hosts.
7. He gathers the waters of the sea like a mound; He places the deep waters in vaults.
8. Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world tremble before Him.
9. For He spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it endured.
10. The Lord has annulled the counsel of nations; He has foiled the schemes of peoples.
11. The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the thoughts of His heart throughout all generations.
12. Fortunate is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people He chose as a heritage for Himself.
13. The Lord looks down from heaven; He beholds all mankind.
14. From His dwelling-place He looks intently upon all the inhabitants of the earth.
15. It is He Who fashions the hearts of them all, Who perceives all their actions.
16. The king is not saved by a great army, nor a warrior rescued by great might.
17. The horse is a false guarantee for victory; with all its great strength it offers no escape.
18. But the eye of the Lord is directed toward those who fear Him, toward those who hope for His kindness,
19. to save their soul from death and to sustain them during famine.
20. Our soul yearns for the Lord; He is our help and our shield.
21. For our heart shall rejoice in Him, for we have put our trust in His Holy Name.
22. May Your kindness, Lord, be upon us, as we have placed our hope in You.
Chapter 34
This psalm tells of when David was in grave danger while at the palace of Achish, brother of Goliath. David acted like a madman, letting spittle run down his beard, and writing on the doors: "Achish, king of Gath, owes me one hundred thousand gold coins," leading Achish to eject him from the palace. In his joy, David composed this psalm in alphabetical sequence.
1. By David, when he feigned insanity before Avimelech,1 who then drove him away, and he left.
2. I bless the Lord at all times; His praise is always in my mouth.
3. My soul glories in the Lord; let the humble hear it and rejoice.
4. Exalt the Lord with me, and let us extol His Name together.
5. I sought the Lord and He answered me; He delivered me from all my fears.
6. Those who look to Him are radiant; their faces are never humiliated.
7. This poor man called, and the Lord heard; He delivered him from all his tribulations.
8. The angel of the Lord camps around those who fear Him, and rescues them.
9. Taste and see that the Lord is good; fortunate is the man who trusts in Him.
10. Fear the Lord, you His holy ones, for those who fear Him suffer no want.
11. Young lions may want and hunger, but those who seek the Lord shall not lack any good thing.
12. Come, children, listen to me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord.
13. Who is the man who desires life, who loves long life wherein to see goodness?
14. Guard your tongue from evil, and your lips from speaking deceit.
15. Turn away from evil and do good, seek peace and pursue it.
16. The eyes of the Lord are directed toward the righteous, and His ears toward their cry.
17. The wrath of the Lord is upon the evildoers, to excise their memory from the earth.
18. But when they [repent and] cry out, the Lord hears, and saves them from all their troubles.
19. The Lord is close to the broken-hearted, and saves those with a crushed spirit.
20. Many are the afflictions of a righteous person, but the Lord rescues him from them all.
21. He protects all his bones; not one of them is broken.
22. Evil brings death upon the wicked, and the enemies of the righteous are condemned.
23. The Lord redeems the soul of His servants; all who take shelter in Him are not condemned.
FOOTNOTES
1.All Philistine kings are referred to by the name Avimelech (Rashi).
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 7
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Tuesday, 5 Tevet, 5777 · 3 January 2017
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 7
• אך מי שהוא בזוללי בשר וסובאי יין למלאות תאות גופו ונפשו הבהמית, שהוא בחינת יסוד המים מארבע יסודות הרעים שבה שממנו מדת התאוה
• Rambam - Tuesday, 5 Tevet, 5777 · 3 January 2017
• Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
• Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Negative Commandment 355
Out of Wedlock Intimacy
"There shall be no indecent women among the daughters of Israel"—Deuteronomy 23:18.
It is forbidden for a man and woman to be intimate unless married to each other.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Out of Wedlock Intimacy
Negative Commandment 355
Translated by Berel Bell
The 355th prohibition is that we are forbidden from having relations with a woman without [giving her] a Kesubah and acquiring her (kiddushin).
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "There may not be any prostitutes among Jewish girls."
This same commandment is repeated, but using a different expression, in G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The Sifra says, " 'Do not defile your daughter' — this command is directed towards a man who hands over his unmarried daughter for sexual relations without marriage, as well as a girl who herself has sexual relations without marriage."
Now listen as I explain why the prohibition is repeated with this wording,3 and what the repetition adds. G‑d (exalted be He) has already instructed us in the Torah that a man who has relations with a virgin incurs none of the punishments4, regardless of whether he seduced or raped her. Rather, he must pay a monetary fine and marry the girl that he harmed, as explained in the Torah.5
Accordingly, a person might think that since the offender is only required to pay a fine, therefore this is looked upon as a purely financial case. Therefore, just as a person, if he wishes, is allowed to give away his money to another person, or to forgive a debt, so too, [he might think,] he may take his unmarried daughter and give her to a man to have relations with her. This would be like forgiving a debt due to him, since the 50 silver [shekels which the seducer or rapist must pay] go to the father. Alternatively, a person might think that [since this is purely a financial matter,] he may give his daughter on condition that the man pays a certain amount of money.
Therefore, the Torah prohibited this and said, "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The monetary fine only refers to a case where the seduction or rape actually occurred. But it is still completely forbidden for them to engage in sexual relations, even when they both agree.
The Torah also reveals the reason for this prohibition: ["Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations,] and you will then not make the land sexually immoral, and the land [will not] be filled with perversion." The explanation of this: seduction and rape occur very rarely, but if the Torah allowed premarital relations when both parties agree, it would occur often and become widespread throughout the world.
This is a fine and wondrous explanation of this verse, and fits all the sayings of our Sages and laws of the Torah.
This prohibition, i.e. the prohibition of [having relations with] an unmarried woman, is punishable by lashes.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in Kesubos and Kiddushin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 23:18.
2.Lev. 19:29.
3.Directed to the father, unlike the other verse, which is phrased as a general prohibition.
4.. Such as lashes or execution.
5.Ex. 22:15. Deut. 22:28. See P220, P218.
• Rambam - 1 Chapter: Gezelah va'Avedah Gezelah va'Avedah - Chapter Four
• Gezelah va'Avedah - Chapter Four
• Ishut - Chapter Eleven
• Tuesday, 5 Tevet, 5777 · 3 January 2017
• "Today's Day"
• Sunday, Tevet 5*, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayigash, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 29-34.
Tanya: Ch. 6. "The A-lmighty (p. 21)..."ruination of the spirit..." (p. 23).
When Mashiach comes we will realize the greatness of hoda'a (acknowledgement, or belief) and t'mimut (earnestness), everyone's pure faith in G-d and His Torah and mitzvot. Talmud - namely, human comprehension, even on its highest level - is limited. But hoda'a, faith, is a feeling that is boundless. Mashiach will explain the magnificent achievement of t'mimut - earnest avoda flowing from the heart.
FOOTNOTES
*.This day is the chassidic festival of didan natzach ("our side is victorious," viz. Vayikra Raba 24:3) marking the issuance, in 5747 (1987), of a US Federal Court ruling which placed the legal imprimatur of the USA upon the total exclusive ownership by Agudas Chassidei Chabad of the great library and collection of s'farim (Torah-books) and k'tavim (manuscripts) of the Chabad Rebbe'im. "The day on which 'our side was victorious' (didan natzach) openly, in sight of all the nations (in Federal Court) with regard to the s'farim and k'tavim of our Rebbe'im - leaders, in the library of Lubavitch." (Note by the Rebbe of righteous memory to sicha of Tuesday, Tevet 5, 5747).
• Daily Thought:
From Beyond, With Love
A miracle is what occurs when a force from beyond our tightly defined little world enters within.
That is why to see a miracle, you need an open heart and mind.
Open enough to receive the Infinite.
Chumash: Parshat Vayigash, 3rd Portion (Genesis 45:8-45:27) with Rashi
• Genesis Chapter 45
8And now, you did not send me here, but God, and He made me a father to Pharaoh, a lord over all his household, and a ruler over the entire land of Egypt. חוְעַתָּ֗ה לֹֽא־אַתֶּ֞ם שְׁלַחְתֶּ֤ם אֹתִי֙ הֵ֔נָּה כִּ֖י הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים וַיְשִׂימֵ֨נִי לְאָ֜ב לְפַרְעֹ֗ה וּלְאָדוֹן֙ לְכָל־בֵּית֔וֹ וּמשֵׁ֖ל בְּכָל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם:
a father: A colleague and a protector. [From Gen. Rabbah 93:10] לאב: חבר ופטרון:
9Hasten and go up to my father, and say to him, 'So said your son, Joseph: "God has made me a lord over all the Egyptians. Come down to me, do not tarry. טמַֽהֲרוּ֘ וַֽעֲל֣וּ אֶל־אָבִי֒ וַֽאֲמַרְתֶּ֣ם אֵלָ֗יו כֹּ֤ה אָמַר֙ בִּנְךָ֣ יוֹסֵ֔ף שָׂמַ֧נִי אֱלֹהִ֛ים לְאָד֖וֹן לְכָל־מִצְרָ֑יִם רְדָ֥ה אֵלַ֖י אַל־תַּֽעֲמֹֽד:
and go up to my father: The land of Israel is higher than all [other] lands. [From Kidd. 69a, b] ועלו אל אבי: ארץ ישראל גבוה מכל הארצות:
10And you shall dwell in the land of Goshen, and you shall be near to me, you and your children and your grandchildren, and your flocks and your cattle and all that is yours. יוְיָֽשַׁבְתָּ֣ בְאֶֽרֶץ־גּ֗שֶׁן וְהָיִ֤יתָ קָרוֹב֙ אֵלַ֔י אַתָּ֕ה וּבָנֶ֖יךָ וּבְנֵ֣י בָנֶ֑יךָ וְצֹֽאנְךָ֥ וּבְקָֽרְךָ֖ וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ:
11And I will sustain you there for there are still five years of famine lest you become impoverished, you and your household and all that is yours." ' יאוְכִלְכַּלְתִּ֤י אֹֽתְךָ֙ שָׁ֔ם כִּי־ע֛וֹד חָמֵ֥שׁ שָׁנִ֖ים רָעָ֑ב פֶּן־תִּוָּרֵ֛שׁ אַתָּ֥ה וּבֵֽיתְךָ֖ וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ:
lest you become impoverished: Heb. פֶּן-תִּוָּרֵשׁ, [which Onkelos renders:] דָּלְמָא תִתְמַסְכַּן, lest you become impoverished, [which is] an expression similar to“impoverishes (מוֹרִישׁ) and makes rich” (I Sam. 2:7). פן תורש: דלמא תתמסכן, לשון (שמואל א' ב ז) מוריש ומעשיר:
12And behold, your eyes see, as well as the eyes of my brother Benjamin, that it is my mouth speaking to you. יבוְהִנֵּ֤ה עֵֽינֵיכֶם֙ רֹא֔וֹת וְעֵינֵ֖י אָחִ֣י בִנְיָמִ֑ין כִּי־פִ֖י הַֽמְדַבֵּ֥ר אֲלֵיכֶֽם:
And behold, your eyes see: my glory and that I am your brother, for I am circumcised like you, and moreover, that it is my mouth that is speaking to you in the holy tongue (Gen. Rabbah 93:10). והנה עיניכם רואות: בכבודי, ושאני אחיכם, שהרי אני מהול ככם. ועוד כי פי המדבר אליכם בלשון הקודש:
as well as the eyes of my brother Benjamin: He compared them all together, saying that“just as I harbor no hatred against my brother Benjamin, for he did not participate in selling me, neither do I have any hatred in my heart against you.” [from Meg. 16b] ועיני אחי בנימין: השוה את כולם יחד לומר שכשם שאין לי שנאה על בנימין אחי, שהרי לא היה במכירתי, כך אין בלבי שנאה עליכם:
13And you shall tell my father [of] all my honor in Egypt and all that you have seen, and you shall hasten and bring my father down here." יגוְהִגַּדְתֶּ֣ם לְאָבִ֗י אֶת־כָּל־כְּבוֹדִי֙ בְּמִצְרַ֔יִם וְאֵ֖ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר רְאִיתֶ֑ם וּמִֽהַרְתֶּ֛ם וְהֽוֹרַדְתֶּ֥ם אֶת־אָבִ֖י הֵֽנָּה:
14And he fell on his brother Benjamin's neck and wept, and Benjamin wept on his neck. ידוַיִּפֹּ֛ל עַל־צַוְּארֵ֥י בִנְיָֽמִן־אָחִ֖יו וַיֵּ֑בְךְּ וּבִ֨נְיָמִ֔ן בָּכָ֖ה עַל־צַוָּארָֽיו:
And he fell on his brother Benjamin’s neck and wept: for the two sanctuaries which were destined to be in Benjamin’s territory and would ultimately be destroyed. [From Meg. 16b] ויפול על צוארי בנימין אחיו ויבך: על שני מקדשות שעתידין להיות בחלקו של בנימין וסופן ליחרב:
and Benjamin wept on his neck: for the Tabernacle of Shiloh, which was destined to be in Joseph’s territory yet would ultimately be destroyed. [From Meg. 16b, Gen. Rabbah 93:12] ובנימין בכה על צואריו: על משכן שילה שעתיד להיות בחלקו של יוסף וסופו ליחרב:
15And he kissed all his brothers and wept over them, and afterwards his brothers spoke with him. טווַיְנַשֵּׁ֥ק לְכָל־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֵּ֣בְךְּ עֲלֵהֶ֑ם וְאַ֣חֲרֵי כֵ֔ן דִּבְּר֥וּ אֶחָ֖יו אִתּֽוֹ:
And he kissed: He continued to kiss וינשק: הוסיף בנשיקה, מנשק והולך. דיבייש"ר בלע"ז:
and afterwards: After they saw him weeping and that he was wholehearted with them. ואחרי כן: מאחר שראוהו בוכה ולבו שלם עמהם:
his brothers spoke with him: whereas previously they had felt shame before him. [From Tanchuma Vayigash 5] דברו אחיו אתו: שמתחלה היו בושים ממנו:
16And the voice was heard [in] Pharaoh's house, saying, "Joseph's brothers have come!" And it pleased Pharaoh and his servants. טזוְהַקֹּ֣ל נִשְׁמַ֗ע בֵּ֤ית פַּרְעֹה֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר בָּ֖אוּ אֲחֵ֣י יוֹסֵ֑ף וַיִּיטַב֙ בְּעֵינֵ֣י פַרְעֹ֔ה וּבְעֵינֵ֖י עֲבָדָֽיו:
And the voice was heard [in] Pharaoh’s house: Heb. בֵּית פַּרְעֹה, equivalent to בְּבֵית פַּרְעֹה, and this is an expression [denoting] an actual house. [From Targum Onkelos] והקול נשמע בית פרעה: כמו בבית פרעה, וזהו לשון בית ממש:
17And Pharaoh said to Joseph, "Tell your brothers, 'Do this load up your beasts and go, enter the land of Canaan. יזוַיֹּ֤אמֶר פַּרְעֹה֙ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֔ף אֱמֹ֥ר אֶל־אַחֶ֖יךָ זֹ֣את עֲשׂ֑וּ טַֽעֲנוּ֙ אֶת־בְּעִ֣ירְכֶ֔ם וּלְכוּ־בֹ֖אוּ אַ֥רְצָה כְּנָֽעַן:
load up your beasts: with grain. טענו את בעירכם: תבואה:
18And take your father and your households and come to me, and I will give you the best of the land of Egypt, and [you will] eat the fat of the land.' יחוּקְח֧וּ אֶת־אֲבִיכֶ֛ם וְאֶת־בָּֽתֵּיכֶ֖ם וּבֹ֣אוּ אֵלָ֑י וְאֶתְּנָ֣ה לָכֶ֗ם אֶת־טוּב֙ אֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם וְאִכְל֖וּ אֶת־חֵ֥לֶב הָאָֽרֶץ:
the best of the land of Egypt: [I.e.,] the land of Goshen. He prophesied but did not know what he was prophesying. They (the Israelites) would eventually make it (Egypt) like the depths of the sea, which have no fish. [From Avoth d’Rabbi Nathan, second version, ch. 43; Ber. 9b] את טוב ארץ מצרים: ארץ גושן. ניבא ואינו יודע מה ניבא, סופם לעשותה כמצולה שאין בה דגים:
the fat of the land: Heb. חֵלֶב הָאָרֶץ. Every [instance of] חֵלֶב is an expression meaning the best. [From Targum Onkelos] חלב הארץ: כל חלב לשון מיטב הוא:
19And you [Joseph] have been commanded [to tell them], 'Do this: take yourselves wagons from the land of Egypt for your young children and for your wives, and you shall carry your father and come. יטוְאַתָּ֥ה צֻוֵּ֖יתָה זֹ֣את עֲשׂ֑וּ קְחֽוּ־לָכֶם֩ מֵאֶ֨רֶץ מִצְרַ֜יִם עֲגָל֗וֹת לְטַפְּכֶם֙ וְלִנְשֵׁיכֶ֔ם וּנְשָׂאתֶ֥ם אֶת־אֲבִיכֶ֖ם וּבָאתֶֽם:
And you [Joseph] have been commanded: By me to say to them. [From Targum Jonathan] ואתה צויתה: מפי לומר להם:
Do this: So shall you say to them, that it is in my power [to provide for you]. זאת עשו: כך אמור להם שברשותי הוא:
20And let your eye not be concerned about your utensils, for the best of all the land of Egypt is yours.' " כוְעֵ֣ינְכֶ֔ם אַל־תָּחֹ֖ס עַל־כְּלֵיכֶ֑ם כִּי־ט֛וּב כָּל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם לָכֶ֥ם הֽוּא:
21And the sons of Israel did so, and Joseph gave them wagons by Pharaoh's orders, and he gave them provisions for the way. כאוַיַּֽעֲשׂוּ־כֵן֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיִּתֵּ֨ן לָהֶ֥ם יוֹסֵ֛ף עֲגָל֖וֹת עַל־פִּ֣י פַרְעֹ֑ה וַיִּתֵּ֥ן לָהֶ֛ם צֵדָ֖ה לַדָּֽרֶךְ:
22He gave them all, to each one [several] changes of clothes, and to Benjamin he gave three hundred [pieces of] silver and five changes of clothes. כבלְכֻלָּ֥ם נָתַ֛ן לָאִ֖ישׁ חֲלִפ֣וֹת שְׂמָלֹ֑ת וּלְבִנְיָמִ֤ן נָתַן֙ שְׁל֣שׁ מֵא֣וֹת כֶּ֔סֶף וְחָמֵ֖שׁ חֲלִפֹ֥ת שְׂמָלֹֽת:
23And to his father he sent the following: ten he donkeys carrying of the best of Egypt, and ten she donkeys carrying grain, bread, and [other] food, for his father for the way. כגוּלְאָבִ֞יו שָׁלַ֤ח כְּזֹאת֙ עֲשָׂרָ֣ה חֲמֹרִ֔ים נֹֽשְׂאִ֖ים מִטּ֣וּב מִצְרָ֑יִם וְעֶ֣שֶׂר אֲתֹנֹ֡ת נֹֽ֠שְׂאֹ֠ת בָּ֣ר וָלֶ֧חֶם וּמָז֛וֹן לְאָבִ֖יו לַדָּֽרֶךְ:
he sent the following: Heb. כְּזֹאת, lit., like this, [meaning:] according to this amount. And what is the amount? Ten he-donkeys, etc. שלח כזאת: כחשבון הזה. ומהו החשבון, עשרה חמורים וגו':
of the best of Egypt: We find in the Talmud (Meg. 16b) that he sent him aged wine because elderly people find contentment with it. [I.e., the fact that wine improves with age often affords contentment to the elderly.] According to the Midrash Aggadah (Gen. Rabbah 94:2 on verse 18), however, this refers to pounded beans [which have a soothing effect on a troubled spirit]. מטוב מצרים: מצינו בתלמוד ששלח לו יין (ישן) שדעת זקנים נוחה הימנו. ומדרש אגדה גריסין של פול:
grain, bread: As the Targum renders. בר ולחם: כתרגומו:
and [other] food: Things eaten with bread. ומזון: ליפתן:
24And he sent off his brothers, and they went, and he said to them, "Do not quarrel on the way." כדוַיְשַׁלַּ֥ח אֶת־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֵּלֵ֑כוּ וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אַל־תִּרְגְּז֖וּ בַּדָּֽרֶךְ:
Do not quarrel on the way: Heb. אַל-תִּרְגְזוּ בַּדָּרֶ. Do not engage in a halachic discussion lest the way cause you to stray. Another explanation: Do not walk with large steps, and enter the city while the sun is shining (Ta’anith 10b). According to the simple meaning of the verse, we can say that since they were ashamed, he (Joseph) was concerned that they would perhaps quarrel on the way about his being sold, debating with one another, and saying,“Because of you he was sold. You slandered him and caused us to hate him.” אל תרגזו בדרך: אל תתעסקו בדבר הלכה שלא תרגז עליכם הדרך. דבר אחר אל תפסיעו פסיעה גסה והכניסו חמה לעיר. ולפי פשוטו של מקרא יש לומר לפי שהיו נכלמים היה דואג שמא יריבו בדרך על דבר מכירתו להתווכח זה עם זה ולומר על ידך נמכר, אתה ספרת לשון הרע עליו וגרמת לנו לשנאתו:
25So they went up from Egypt, and they came to the land of Canaan, to their father, Jacob. כהוַיַּֽעֲל֖וּ מִמִּצְרָ֑יִם וַיָּבֹ֨אוּ֙ אֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן אֶל־יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב אֲבִיהֶֽם:
26And they told him, saying, "Joseph is still alive," and [they told him] that he ruled over the entire land of Egypt, and his heart changed, for he did not believe them. כווַיַּגִּ֨דוּ ל֜וֹ לֵאמֹ֗ר ע֚וֹד יוֹסֵ֣ף חַ֔י וְכִי־ה֥וּא משֵׁ֖ל בְּכָל־אֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם וַיָּ֣פָג לִבּ֔וֹ כִּ֥י לֹא־הֶֽאֱמִ֖ין לָהֶֽם:
and [they told him] that he ruled: Heb. וְכִי הוּא משֵׁל, and that he rules. וכי הוא מושל: ואשר הוא מושל:
and his heart changed: Heb. וַיָפָג לִבָּוֹ. His heart changed and went away from believing. His heart did not turn to [believe] these words. [וַיָפָג is] a term similar to“their taste changes” (מְפִיגִין טַעְמָן) in the language of the Mishnah (Bezah 14a), and“without respite (הֲפֻגוֹת)” (Lam. 3:49). Also“and its bouquet did not change” (Jer. 48: 11) is translated [into Aramaic] as וְרֵיחֵיה ָלֹא פָג. ויפג לבו: נחלף לבו והלך מלהאמין, לא היה לבו פונה אל הדברים, לשון מפיגין טעמן, בלשון משנה וכמו (איכה ג מט) מאין הפוגות, (ירמיה מח יא) וריחו לא נמר מתרגמינן וריחיה לא פג:
27And they told him all of Joseph's words that he had said to them, and he saw the wagons that Joseph had sent to carry him, and the spirit of their father Jacob was revived. כזוַיְדַבְּר֣וּ אֵלָ֗יו אֵ֣ת כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֤י יוֹסֵף֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר דִּבֶּ֣ר אֲלֵהֶ֔ם וַיַּרְא֙ אֶת־הָ֣עֲגָל֔וֹת אֲשֶׁר־שָׁלַ֥ח יוֹסֵ֖ף לָשֵׂ֣את אֹת֑וֹ וַתְּחִ֕י ר֖וּחַ יַֽעֲקֹ֥ב אֲבִיהֶֽם:
all of Joseph’s words: He (Joseph) gave them a sign, viz., in what topic he was engaged when he (Joseph) separated from him (Jacob). [That was] the section dealing with the heifer that was to be beheaded (עֶגְלָה עִרוּפָה) (Deut. 21), and this is what [Scripture] says, “and he saw the wagons that Joseph had sent,” and it (Scripture) does not say, “that Pharaoh had sent.” [from Gen. Rabbah 94:3] את כל דברי יוסף: סימן מסר להם במה היה עוסק כשפירש ממנו, בפרשת עגלה ערופה, זהו שאמר וירא את העגלות אשר שלח יוסף ולא אמר אשר שלח פרעה:
and the spirit of…Jacob was revived: The Shechinah, which had separated from him [because of his grief], rested upon him [once again]. [From Avoth d’Rabbi Nathan , ch. 30, Targum Onkelos , Targum Jonathan] ותחי רוח יעקב: שרתה עליו שכינה שפירשה ממנו:
• Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 29-34
• Chapter 29
The Name of God appears eighteen times in this psalm, corresponding to which our Sages established eighteen blessings-the Amidah. The entire psalm can be interpreted as referring to the giving of the Torah and the ingathering of the exiles.
1. A psalm by David. Render to the Lord, children of the mighty, render to the Lord honor and strength.
2. Render to the Lord the honor due to His Name; bow down to the Lord in resplendent holiness.
3. The voice of the Lord is over the waters, the God of glory thunders; the Lord is over mighty waters.
4. The voice of the Lord resounds with might; the voice of the Lord resounds with majesty.
5. The voice of the Lord breaks cedars; the Lord shatters the cedars of Lebanon.
6. He makes them leap like a calf, Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox.
7. The voice of the Lord strikes flames of fire.
8. The voice of the Lord makes the desert tremble; the Lord causes the desert of Kadesh to tremble.
9. The voice of the Lord causes the does to calve, and strips the forests bare; and in His Sanctuary all proclaim His glory.
10. The Lord sat [as King] at the Flood; the Lord will sit as King forever.
11. The Lord will give strength to His people; the Lord will bless His people with peace.
Chapter 30
This psalm teaches one not to be distressed if God visits suffering upon him in this world, for only through suffering can one enter the World to Come. Even one of great spiritual stature should realize that his stability is not guaranteed, but that all is in the hands of God.
1. A psalm, a song of dedication of the House, by David.
2. I exalt You, Lord, for You have uplifted me, and did not allow my enemies to rejoice over me.
3. Lord, my God, I cried out to You, and You healed me.
4. Lord, You have brought up my soul from the grave; You have kept me alive, that I should not descend to the pit.
5. Sing to the Lord, you His pious ones, and praise His holy Name.
6. For His wrath endures but for a moment, when He is conciliated there is [long] life; when one retires at night weeping, joy will come in the morning.
7. In my security I thought, "I shall never falter.”
8. Lord, by Your favor You have made my mountain stand strong; when You concealed Your countenance I was alarmed.
9. I called to You, O Lord, and I made supplication to my Lord:
10. What profit is there in my death, in my going down to the grave? Can dust praise You? Can it proclaim Your truth
11. Lord, hear and be gracious to me; Lord, be a help to me.
12. You have turned my mourning into dancing; You have undone my sackcloth and girded me with joy.
13. Therefore my soul shall sing to You, and not be silent; Lord my God, I will praise You forever.
Chapter 31
Composed by a destitute and oppressed David, running from Saul while placing his trust in God, this psalm instructs man to put his trust in God alone.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. In You I have taken shelter, O Lord, I shall never be shamed; rescue me in Your righteousness.
3. Turn Your ear to me, save me quickly; be to me a rock of refuge, a fortress to deliver me.
4. For You are my rock and my fortress; for the sake of Your Name, direct me and lead me.
5. Remove me from the net they planted for me, for You are my stronghold.
6. I entrust my spirit into Your hand; You will redeem me, Lord, God of truth.
7. I despise those who anticipate worthless vanities; but I trust in the Lord.
8. I will rejoice and delight in Your kindness, for You have seen my affliction; You know the troubles of my soul.
9. You have not delivered me into the hand of the enemy; You have set my feet on spacious ground.
10. Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I am in distress; my eye wastes away from vexation-my soul and my stomach.
11. For my life is spent in sorrow, my years in sighing; my strength fails because of my iniquity, and my bones are wasted away.
12. Because of my adversaries I have become a disgrace-exceedingly to my neighbors, and a dread to my friends; those who see me outside flee from me.
13. Like a dead man, I was forgotten from the heart; I became like a lost vessel.
14. For I have heard the slander of many, terror on every side, when they assembled together against me and plotted to take my life.
15. But I trusted in You, O Lord; I said, "You are my God.”
16. My times are in Your hand; save me from the hands of my enemies and pursuers.
17. Shine Your countenance upon Your servant; deliver me in Your kindness.
18. O Lord, let me not be ashamed, for I have called You; let the wicked be shamed, let them be silent to the grave.
19. Let the lips of falsehood-which speak insolently against the righteous, with arrogance and contempt-be struck dumb.
20. How abundant is Your good that You have hidden for those who fear You; in the presence of man, You have acted for those who take refuge in You.
21. Conceal them from the haughtiness of man, in the shelter of Your countenance; hide them in a shelter from the strife of tongues.
22. Blessed is the Lord, for He has been wondrous in His kindness to me in a besieged city.
23. I said in my panic, "I am cut off from before Your eyes!" But in truth, You heard the voice of my pleas when I cried to You.
24. Love the Lord, all His pious ones! The Lord preserves the faithful, and repays with exactness those who act haughtily.
25. Be strong and fortify your hearts, all who put their hope in the Lord!
Chapter 32
This psalm speaks of forgiveness of sin, and of the good fortune of one who repents and confesses to God wholeheartedly.
1. By David, a maskil.1Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
2. Fortunate is the man to whom the Lord does not reckon his sin, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.
3. When I was silent, my limbs wore away through my wailing all day long.
4. For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; my marrow became [dry] as the droughts of summer, Selah.
5. My sin I made known to You, my iniquity I did not cover. I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord," and You have forgiven the iniquity of my transgression forever.
6. For this let every pious man pray to You, at a time when You may be found; indeed, the flood of many waters will not reach him.
7. You are a refuge to me; protect me from distress; surround me with songs of deliverance forever.
8. I will enlighten you and educate you in the path you should go; I will advise you with what I have seen.
9. Be not like a horse, like a mule, senseless, that must be muzzled with bit and bridle when being adorned, so that it not come near you.
10. Many are the agonies of the wicked, but he who trusts in the Lord is surrounded by kindness.
11. Rejoice in the Lord and exult, you righteous ones! Sing joyously, all you upright of heart!
FOOTNOTES
1.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
Chapter 33
This psalm teaches the righteous and upright to praise God. For the more one knows of the Torah's wisdom, the more should he praise God, for he knows and understands His greatness.
1. Sing joyously to the Lord, you righteous ones; it is fitting for the upright to offer praise.
2. Extol the Lord with a harp; sing to Him with a ten-stringed lyre.
3. Sing to Him a new song; play well with sounds of jubilation.
4. For the word of the Lord is just; all His deeds are done in faithfulness.
5. He loves righteousness and justice; the kindness of the Lord fills the earth.
6. By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their hosts.
7. He gathers the waters of the sea like a mound; He places the deep waters in vaults.
8. Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world tremble before Him.
9. For He spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it endured.
10. The Lord has annulled the counsel of nations; He has foiled the schemes of peoples.
11. The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the thoughts of His heart throughout all generations.
12. Fortunate is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people He chose as a heritage for Himself.
13. The Lord looks down from heaven; He beholds all mankind.
14. From His dwelling-place He looks intently upon all the inhabitants of the earth.
15. It is He Who fashions the hearts of them all, Who perceives all their actions.
16. The king is not saved by a great army, nor a warrior rescued by great might.
17. The horse is a false guarantee for victory; with all its great strength it offers no escape.
18. But the eye of the Lord is directed toward those who fear Him, toward those who hope for His kindness,
19. to save their soul from death and to sustain them during famine.
20. Our soul yearns for the Lord; He is our help and our shield.
21. For our heart shall rejoice in Him, for we have put our trust in His Holy Name.
22. May Your kindness, Lord, be upon us, as we have placed our hope in You.
Chapter 34
This psalm tells of when David was in grave danger while at the palace of Achish, brother of Goliath. David acted like a madman, letting spittle run down his beard, and writing on the doors: "Achish, king of Gath, owes me one hundred thousand gold coins," leading Achish to eject him from the palace. In his joy, David composed this psalm in alphabetical sequence.
1. By David, when he feigned insanity before Avimelech,1 who then drove him away, and he left.
2. I bless the Lord at all times; His praise is always in my mouth.
3. My soul glories in the Lord; let the humble hear it and rejoice.
4. Exalt the Lord with me, and let us extol His Name together.
5. I sought the Lord and He answered me; He delivered me from all my fears.
6. Those who look to Him are radiant; their faces are never humiliated.
7. This poor man called, and the Lord heard; He delivered him from all his tribulations.
8. The angel of the Lord camps around those who fear Him, and rescues them.
9. Taste and see that the Lord is good; fortunate is the man who trusts in Him.
10. Fear the Lord, you His holy ones, for those who fear Him suffer no want.
11. Young lions may want and hunger, but those who seek the Lord shall not lack any good thing.
12. Come, children, listen to me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord.
13. Who is the man who desires life, who loves long life wherein to see goodness?
14. Guard your tongue from evil, and your lips from speaking deceit.
15. Turn away from evil and do good, seek peace and pursue it.
16. The eyes of the Lord are directed toward the righteous, and His ears toward their cry.
17. The wrath of the Lord is upon the evildoers, to excise their memory from the earth.
18. But when they [repent and] cry out, the Lord hears, and saves them from all their troubles.
19. The Lord is close to the broken-hearted, and saves those with a crushed spirit.
20. Many are the afflictions of a righteous person, but the Lord rescues him from them all.
21. He protects all his bones; not one of them is broken.
22. Evil brings death upon the wicked, and the enemies of the righteous are condemned.
23. The Lord redeems the soul of His servants; all who take shelter in Him are not condemned.
FOOTNOTES
1.All Philistine kings are referred to by the name Avimelech (Rashi).
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 7
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Tuesday, 5 Tevet, 5777 · 3 January 2017
• Likutei Amarim, middle of Chapter 7
• אך מי שהוא בזוללי בשר וסובאי יין למלאות תאות גופו ונפשו הבהמית, שהוא בחינת יסוד המים מארבע יסודות הרעים שבה שממנו מדת התאוה
On the other hand, if a person is one of those who gluttonously eat meat and quaff wine in order to satisfy their bodily appetites and animal soul, then since, of the animal soul’s four evil elements, this desirebelongs to the element of Water, from which comes the appetite for pleasures,
As explained in the first chapter, all evil characteristics come from the four evil elements of the animal soul, with the appetite for pleasures emanating from the element of Water,
הנה על ידי זה יורד חיות הבשר והיין שבקרבו, ונכלל לפי שעה ברע גמור שבשלש קליפות הטמאות
in such case the vitality of the meat and wine that he ingested is thereby degraded, and absorbed temporarily in the utter evil of the three unclean kelipot.
וגופו נעשה להן לבוש ומרכבה
His (the glutton’s) body becomes a garment and a “vehicle” for these kelipot.
The term “vehicle” is an analogy for total subservience; just as a vehicle is completely subservient to the will of its driver, having no will of its own, so (in this case) is this person totally subservient to the three unclean kelipot.
לפי שעה, עד אשר ישוב האדם ויחזור לעבודת ה׳ ולתורתו
But his body remains so [only] temporarily, until the person repents and returns to the service of G‑d and His Torah — whereupon he ceases to be a vehicle for the kelipot; the energy of the food and drink is then released from thekelipot and returns to Sanctity.
כי לפי שהיה בשר היתר ויין כשר, לכך יכולים לחזור ולעלות עמו בשובו לעבודת ה׳
For, inasmuch as the meat and wine were kosher and permissible and it was only the person’s desire for pleasure that degraded them, they have the power to revert and ascend with him when he returns to the service of G‑d — at which time the strength gained from the food and drink are utilized in serving G‑d.
שזהו לשון היתר ומותר, כלומר: שאינו קשור ואסור בידי החיצונים
This is implied in the terms hetter (“permissibility”) and mutar (“permissible”). That which may be done or eaten is called “mutar”, literally meaning “released” or “unbound”. In our context the term means that the permissible object is not “chained” to the kelipot. That is to say, it is not tied and bound by the power of the “extraneous forces,”i.e., the kelipot and sitra achra which are extraneous to the realm of Sanctity,
שלא יוכל לחזור ולעלות לה׳
preventing it from returning and ascending to G‑d.
Rather, it can return and ascend to G‑d when the person involved returns to the service of G‑d, as explained above.
רק שהרשימו ממנו נשאר בגוף
Nevertheless, even when this energy reverts to Sanctity through the person's returns to the service of G‑d, a trace [of the evil] remains in the body.
Eating permissible food for bodily pleasure causes the food to descend into total evil. Subsequently, the food becomes part of the body. Though repentance elevates not only the person but also the energy of the food and drink as well, still, having become a part of the body, a vestige of evil remains.
ועל כן צריך הגוף לחיבוט הקבר, כמו שיתבאר לקמן
For this reason the body must undergo the “Purgatory of the Grave,” as will be explained later.1
Like all heavenly punishments, “Purgatory of the Grave” too is a means of spiritual purification. All remaining traces of evil energy created by eating and drinking for bodily pleasure are removed through this punishment.
וכן החיות שבטפות זרע שיצאו ממנו בתאוה בהמית, שלא קידש עצמו בשעת תשמיש עם אשתו טהורה
So, too, with regard to the vitality of the drops of semen emitted from the body with animal lust, by him who has not conducted himself in a holy manner during intimacy with his wife during her state of purity.Here, too, the vitality is temporarily absorbed in the total evil of the three unclean kelipot until the person repents.
In the above instances, the fault lies not in the acts, which in themselves are permissible, but rather in the person’s intention in doing them — acting out of regard for bodily pleasure, not for the sake of heaven.
מה שאין כן במאכלות אסורות וביאות אסורות, שהן משלש קליפות הטמאות לגמרי
Such is not the case, however, with forbidden foods and illicit coition, which inasmuch as they are prohibited acts derive their vitality from the three entirely unclean kelipot.
הם אסורים וקשורים בידי החיצונים לעולם
These are tied and bound by the “extraneous forces” (the kelipot) forever.
ואין עולים משם עד כי יבוא יומם ויבולע המות לנצח, כמו שכתוב: ואת רוח הטומאה אעביר מן האר׳
They (the vitality of these prohibited acts) are not elevated from [the kelipot] until “their day comes” (the time when evil will totally disappear from the world), when “death (i.e., the kelipot, called ”death“ because they oppose G‑dliness, which is life) will be swallowed up i.e., eradicated forever,” as it is written:2 “And I (G‑d) will remove the spirit of impurity from the earth.” Then, when the kelipot cease to exist, the sparks of holiness will of themselves be freed from them.
או עד שיעשה תשובה גדולה כל כך שזדונות נעשו לו כזכיות ממש
Or, until the sinner repents in the manner presently described, in which case the sparks of holiness need not remain in the clutches of the kelipot until the End of Days; they may even be freed, and restored to holiness, when he (the sinner) repents so earnestly that his premeditated sins become transmuted into veritable merits.
שהיא תשובה מאהבה מעומקא דלבא, באהבה וחשיקה ונפש שוקקה לדבקה בו יתברך
This is achieved through “repentance out of love (of G‑d),” coming from the depths of the heart, with great love and fervor, and from a soul passionately desiring to cleave to the blessed G‑d,
וצמאה נפשו לה׳ כאר׳ עיפה וציה
and thirsting for G‑d like a parched and barren soil thirsts desperately for water.
להיות כי עד הנה היתה נפשו באר׳ ציה וצלמות, היא הסטרא אחרא, ורחוקה מאור פני ה׳ בתכלית
For inasmuch as till now until he repented his soul had been in a barren wilderness and in the shadow of death, which is the sitra achra, and had been far removed from the light of the Divine Countenance, in the greatest possible measure,
ולזאת צמאה נפשו ביתר עז מצמאון נפשות הצדיקים
therefore, now that he “repents out of love” his soul thirsts for G‑d even more intensely than the souls of the righteous who have never sinned.
The righteous tzaddik, ever close to G‑d, is like one who always has water near at hand — his thirst is never so intense. The penitent, however, finds himself as if in a desert, where the very absence of water causes his thirst to burn with greater intensity.
כמאמרם ז״ל: במקום שבעלי תשובה עומדים כו׳
As our Sages say:3 “Where penitents stand…[not even the perfectly righteous can stand]. For, as explained earlier, the tzaddik lacks the penitent’s intense yearning for G‑d.
ועל תשובה מאהבה רבה זו אמרו שזדונות נעשו לו כזכיות, הואיל ועל ידי זה בא לאהבה רבה זו
[Only] concerning repentance out of such great love has it been said4 that [the penitent’s] premeditated sins become, for him, like virtues, since through them (through the sins which previously had distanced him from G‑d) he attained when he repented to this great love. Thus, his sins affected him in the same way as mitzvot: they brought about within him a greater love of G‑d.
In summary: It is possible even now, before evil completely disappears from the earth, to extricate the vitality of forbidden acts from the kelipot, through “repentance out of love of G‑d.”
אבל תשובה שלא מאהבה זו, אף שהיא תשובה נכונה, וה׳ יסלח לו, מכל מקום לא נעשו לו כזכיות
But in the case of repentance that does not come from such love, though it be proper repentance, and G‑d will surely pardon him, nevertheless [his sins] are not transformed for him into the equivalent of virtues.
ואין עולים מהקליפה לגמרי עד עת ק׳, שיבולע המות לנצח
They are not released and hence do not completely ascend from the kelipah so that no trace of the sin remains5 “until the end of time,” when6 “death will be swallowed up forever.”
Thus we have learned that the energy of forbidden foods and illicit coition is released from the kelipot only when one repents out of love or when evil ceases. Now we shall learn that in the case of one specific prohibition, ordinary repentance can accomplish what normally requires “repentance out of love.”
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Ch. 8. |
| 2. | Zechariah 13:2. |
| 3. | Berachot 34b. |
| 4. | Yoma 86b. |
| 5. | Daniel 11:35. |
| 6. | Cf. Yeshayahu 25:8. |
• Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
• Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Negative Commandment 355
Out of Wedlock Intimacy
"There shall be no indecent women among the daughters of Israel"—Deuteronomy 23:18.
It is forbidden for a man and woman to be intimate unless married to each other.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Out of Wedlock Intimacy
Negative Commandment 355
Translated by Berel Bell
The 355th prohibition is that we are forbidden from having relations with a woman without [giving her] a Kesubah and acquiring her (kiddushin).
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "There may not be any prostitutes among Jewish girls."
This same commandment is repeated, but using a different expression, in G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The Sifra says, " 'Do not defile your daughter' — this command is directed towards a man who hands over his unmarried daughter for sexual relations without marriage, as well as a girl who herself has sexual relations without marriage."
Now listen as I explain why the prohibition is repeated with this wording,3 and what the repetition adds. G‑d (exalted be He) has already instructed us in the Torah that a man who has relations with a virgin incurs none of the punishments4, regardless of whether he seduced or raped her. Rather, he must pay a monetary fine and marry the girl that he harmed, as explained in the Torah.5
Accordingly, a person might think that since the offender is only required to pay a fine, therefore this is looked upon as a purely financial case. Therefore, just as a person, if he wishes, is allowed to give away his money to another person, or to forgive a debt, so too, [he might think,] he may take his unmarried daughter and give her to a man to have relations with her. This would be like forgiving a debt due to him, since the 50 silver [shekels which the seducer or rapist must pay] go to the father. Alternatively, a person might think that [since this is purely a financial matter,] he may give his daughter on condition that the man pays a certain amount of money.
Therefore, the Torah prohibited this and said, "Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations." The monetary fine only refers to a case where the seduction or rape actually occurred. But it is still completely forbidden for them to engage in sexual relations, even when they both agree.
The Torah also reveals the reason for this prohibition: ["Do not defile your daughter with premarital relations,] and you will then not make the land sexually immoral, and the land [will not] be filled with perversion." The explanation of this: seduction and rape occur very rarely, but if the Torah allowed premarital relations when both parties agree, it would occur often and become widespread throughout the world.
This is a fine and wondrous explanation of this verse, and fits all the sayings of our Sages and laws of the Torah.
This prohibition, i.e. the prohibition of [having relations with] an unmarried woman, is punishable by lashes.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in Kesubos and Kiddushin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 23:18.
2.Lev. 19:29.
3.Directed to the father, unlike the other verse, which is phrased as a general prohibition.
4.. Such as lashes or execution.
5.Ex. 22:15. Deut. 22:28. See P220, P218.
• Rambam - 1 Chapter: Gezelah va'Avedah Gezelah va'Avedah - Chapter Four
• Gezelah va'Avedah - Chapter Four
1
Our Sages penalized robbers and gave the person whose property was taken the prerogative of taking an oath to support his claim regarding the value of the goods taken. He may then collect that money from the robber, provided that there are two witnesses who testify that this person robbed him.
א
קנס קנסו חכמים לגזלנין שיהיה הנגזל נשבע על כל מה שיטעון ונוטל מן הגזלן. והוא שיהיה זה מוחזק שגזלו בשני עדים:
2
What is implied? A person came into a colleague's home to collect collateral. He was observed by two witnesses. When he entered he was not carrying anything under his cloak, and when he departed he was carrying utensils under his cloak, but the witnesses were not able to discern what the utensils were, and the owner of the home states: "He robbed me of this and this."
Regardless of whether the robber claimed: "I never entered his home and I did not take anything," "I entered his home as the witnesses observed, but I did not take anything. The utensils under my cloak were mine," or he said: "I took this utensil," and the owner claims that he took another utensil besides the one he admits - in all instances the owner of the home must take an oath while holding a sacred article to affirm his claim. He may then collect everything that he claims.
ב
כיצד הרי שנכנס לתוך בית חבירו למשכנו בפני עדים ולא היה כלום תחת כנפיו ויצא וכלים מוטלין לו תחת כנפיו ולא ידעו העדים מה הן ובעל הבית אומר כך וכך גזלתני. בין שאמר הגזלן מעולם לא נכנסתי ולא נטלתי כלום. בין שאמר נכנסתי למשכן כמו שראו העדים אבל לא נטלתי ולא היה תחת כנפי אלא כלים שלי. בין שאמר נטלתי כלי זה ובעל הבית טוען שנטל זה וכלי אחר הרי בעל הבית נשבע בנקיטת חפץ ונוטל כל מה שיטעון:
3
When does the above apply? When the owner claims that the robber took articles that one might assume that he owned or that it was possible that such goods would be entrusted to him for safekeeping, and it was possible for those articles to be taken out by the robber under his cloak, as the witnesses testify.
ג
במה דברים אמורים בשטען דברים שהוא אמוד [א] בהן או שהוא אמוד שמפקידין אצלו אותן דברים שטען וטען בדברים שאפשר שינטלו תחת הכנפים כמו שהעידו העדים:
4
Different rules apply, however, when witnesses observe a person enter a colleague's home to take collateral, but do not see him depart, or they see him depart without appearing to be carrying any utensil under his cloak. Although the owner claims that the defendant took such and such, the defendant is not held liable. This applies even if the defendant denies entering the home and thus contradicts the testimony of the witnesses.
The rationale is that if he claimed: "I entered his home but I did not take anything," he would be required to support his claim with a Rabbinic oath, and then he would be exonerated. For it is possible that he entered with the intent of committing robbery, but did not.
ד
ראוהו עדים שנכנס למשכן את חבירו ולא ראוהו בעת שיצא או שיצא ואין נראה תחת כנפיו כלום ובעל הבית טוען ואומר כך וכך נטל. אפילו אומר מעולם לא נכנסתי שהרי מכחיש את העדים הרי זה פטור שאם אמר נכנסתי ולא נטלתי נשבע שבועת הסת שלא נטל כלום והולך. שאפשר שיכנס [ב] לגזול ולא גזל:
5
Different rules apply when one witness testifies that a person entered a colleague's home and removed utensils under his cloak, but the witness was unable to recognize which utensils were taken, and the person who entered states: "I did not take anything," or he says, "I took goods that you gave to me because of a debt." The person who entered must take an oath while holding a sacred article that he did not commit robbery. He is given this prerogative because he is not considered to be a robber unless two witnesses testify against him.
ה
היה עד אחד מעידו שנכנס ונטל כלים תחת כנפיו ואינו יודע מה הן. והוא אומר לא גזלתי כלום או שאמר בחובי נטלתי. הואיל ואין העד יודע מה היה תחת כנפיו הרי זה נשבע בנקיטת חפץ שלא גזל. שאינו מוחזק בגזלנות אלא בשני עדים:
6
Just as the owner of a home is entitled to take an oath and collect his due from the robber in the instances mentioned in Halachot 1-3, so too, a watchman appointed by the home owner, or even the wife of a watchman, may take such an oath, stating that the person took goods. This obligates the robber to pay.
ו
כשם שבעל הבית נשבע ונוטל מן הגזלן כך שומר של ג בעל הבית אפילו אשתו של שומר נשבעת שזה נטל כך וכך ומשלם הגזלן:
7
If, however, the robber was observed by merely a worker or a harvester of the homeowner, they are not given the prerogative of taking an oath to allow the homeowner to collect against his claim. The person whose property was taken is not given the prerogative of taking the oath, because he was not at home at the time of the robbery. The witnesses are not able to identify the articles that the robber took under his cloak, so their testimony does not obligate him to make restitution. Nor is the robber given the opportunity to clear himself by taking an oath, for we suspect that he might take a false oath.
ז
היה שם לקיטו או שכירו של בעל הבית אינן נשבעין ונוטלין. ואין הנגזל יכול לישבע שהרי לא היה בביתו בשעה שנגזל ואין העדים יודעים מה נטל תחת כנפיו כדי לחייב הגזלן להחזיר. ואין משביעין את הגזלן מפני שהוא חשוד על השבועה:
8
How is this matter resolved? The home owner has a ban of ostracism issued against any person who took goods from his home and does not admit the matter to a court.
Even if the robber admits to having taken certain articles, he is required to return only what he admits, for the owner cannot lodge a definite claim against him.
ח
וכיצד עושים בדין זה מחרים בעל הבית חרם סתם על מי שנטל מביתו כלום ואינו מודה בבית דין. ואפילו הודה הגזלן שגזל קצת מחזיר המקצת שהודה בה בלבד שהרי אין בעל הבית טוענו טענת ודאי:
9
The following rules apply when a person robs one of five people, but does not know whom he robbed, and each of the five claims that it was he whom he robbed. Although there are no witnesses that this person robbed, each of the plaintiffs may take an oath, and then the robber is obligated to pay each the amount he admits.
This is also a penalty enforced by the Sages because he transgressed and robbed. According to Scriptural Law, however, he has no obligation to pay, because the identity of the person whom he robbed is a matter of doubt.
ט
הגוזל אחד מחמשה ואין ידוע מי הוא הנגזל וכל אחד ואחד מהן תובעו ואומר לי גזלת אע"פ שאין שם עדים שגזל הרי כל אחד מהן נשבע שזה גזלו ומשלם [ג] גזלה לכל אחד ואחד. אף דבר זה קנס הוא שקנסוהו חכמים מפני שעבר עבירה וגזל. אבל דין תורה אינו חייב לשלם מספק:
10
The following laws apply when a person tells two colleagues, "I robbed one of you" - or "...one of your fathers..." - "of a maneh, but I don't know whom." If he desires to fulfill his moral and spiritual obligation, he must pay the full amount of the robbery to each of the persons. The law, however, requires only that he give the value of the robbery, and they divide it among themselves.
The rationale is that neither of them knows that he has been robbed; it is the robber himself who is notifying them. Our Sages did not impose a penalty in this instance, because no one is lodging a claim against the robber.
י
אמר לשנים גזלתי אחד מכם או אביו של אחד מכם ואיני יודע איזהו. אם בא לצאת ידי שמים חייב לשלם גזלה לכל אחד ואחד. אבל בדין אינו נותן אלא גזלה אחת והן חולקין אותה ביניהן שהרי אין אחד מהן יודע שנגזל אלא זה בא והודיעם. ולא קנסו חכמים בדבר זה מפני שאין לו תובע:
11
The following laws apply when a person lodges a claim against a colleague, saying: "You robbed me of a maneh." If the defendant replies: "I did not rob from you," he is required to take a sh'vuat hesset, as is the case with regard to any defendant.
If he admits that he robbed him of 50 zuz, he must pay the fifty he admits owing and take an oath required by Scriptural Law with regard to the remainder, as is the case with regard to any person who admits a portion of a claim. He is allowed to take this oath because witnesses did not establish that he was a robber.
Similarly because it was not established that a person was a robber, he is given the benefit of the doubt in the following situation: a person claimed that a colleague entered his home and stole utensils from him. The colleague replied that he took the utensils as collateral for a debt that that person owed him. The owner of the home denied the debt. Although the colleague admitted that he took the collateral without permission, since there are no witnesses who testify that he committed robbery, he is permitted to take an oath and collect the debt he claims from the collateral. For the very mouth that created the problem, rationalized it. Since he is taking an oath and collecting money, he must take an oath while holding a sacred article, as will be explained in Hilchot To'en.
יא
הטוען את חבירו ואמר לו גזלתני מאה. אם אמר לא גזלתי נשבע שבועת היסת כדין כל נתבע. ואם הודה שגזלו חמשים משלם ונשבע שבועת התורה על השאר כדין כל מודה במקצת שהרי לא הוחזק גזלן בעדים. וכן הטוען את חבירו שנכנס לביתו וגזלו כלים והוא אומר דרך משכון לקחתי בחובי שיש לי אצלך ובעל הבית אומר אין לך בידי כלום אע"פ שהודה שמשכנו שלא ברשות הואיל ואין שם עדים שמעידים שגזל הרי זה נשבע [ד] וגובה חובו מן המשכון שהפה שאסר הוא הפה שהתיר. והואיל והוא נשבע ונוטל הרי זה נשבע בנקיטת חפץ כמו שיתבאר בהלכות טוען:
12
The following laws apply when witnesses observe a person enter a colleague's home when the owner is not home, and take utensils. These laws apply even when he does not conceal the utensils, and even when the owner of the home frequently sells his household articles.
If the owner claims: "He robbed them from me," and the defendant claims: "I entered with your permission, and you sold them to me," "...you gave them to me," or "I took them as payment for a debt you owe me," the defendant's claim is not accepted. The rationale is that whenever a person enters a colleague's home when he is not present and takes utensils and removes them in the presence of witnesses, we presume that he is a robber.
Therefore, he must return the utensils to the homeowner. The homeowner is not even required to take an oath, for the witnesses saw that the intruder committed robbery. After the defendant returns the utensils, he may lodge a suit against the homeowner according to his claims, and the judgment will be rendered according to law.
יב
ראוהו עדים שנכנס לתוך בית חבירו [ה] שלא בפני בעל הבית ונטל משם כלים אע"פ שהוציאן מגולין ואע"פ שבעל הבית הזה עשוי למכור את כליו. אם טען ואמר דרך גזל לקחן והלה אומר ברשותך באתי ואתה מכרתם לי או נתתם לי או בחוב שיש לי אצלך תפשתים אינו נאמן שכל הנכנס לבית חבירו שלא בפניו ונטל כלים משם והוציאן בפני עדים הרי זה בחזקת גזלן. לפיכך מחזיר הכלים לבעל הבית ואין כאן שבועה שהרי העדים ראו מה גזל. ואחר שיחזיר חוזר ותובע את בעל הבית בכל מה שיטעון והדין ביניהן:
13
Similarly, if only one witness observed the intruder taking the article, and the homeowner claims that the intruder robbed him of the article, while the defendant claims that he purchased it, he took it as payment for a debt, or it was his and was entrusted to the homeowner for safekeeping, the intruder is obligated to return the article to the homeowner, and the homeowner is not even required to take an oath.
The rationale is that if two witnesses had observed the matter, the defendant would have been obligated to pay. Since there is only one witness, the defendant is required to take an oath. And in this instance he cannot take the oath, because he does not deny the statement of the witness. Therefore, we follow the principle: Whenever a person is obligated to take an oath and cannot take that oath, he must pay.
Accordingly, different rules apply if the defendant denied the matter, saying: "I never entered his house, nor did I take anything." Since there is only one witness, and the defendant denies his testimony, he is obligated to take an oath mandated by Scriptural Law, stating that he did not take anything from the home. With this, he is exonerated.
יג
וכן אם ה היה שם עד אחד בלבד ובעל הבית טוען שגזול הוא כלי זה בידו והלה אומר לקוח הוא בידי או בחוב גביתיו או שלי היה ופקדון הוא אצלך הרי זה חייב להחזיר הכלי לבעליו בלא שבועה שאילו היה שם שני עדים היה חייב לשלם ועכשיו שאין שם אלא עד אחד חייב שבועה ואינו יכול לישבע שהרי אינו מכחיש את העד וכל המחוייב שבועה ואינו יכול לישבע משלם. לפיכך אם [ו] כפר ואמר לא נכנסתי לביתו ולא נטלתי כלום הואיל ואין שם אלא עד אחד והוא מכחישו הרי זה נשבע שבועת התורה שלא לקח מביתו כלום ונפטר:
14
The following incident occurred. A person took a slab of silver from a colleague in the presence of one witness. The person who took the silver said: "Yes, I took it; and it was mine." Our Sages obligated him to return the silver, because the testimony of the witness obligates him to take an oath. He cannot take the oath, because he admits to what the witness says.
Had there not been a witness involved, he would have been able to take a Rabbinic oath that the silver he seized belonged to him.If he denied the statements of the witness and said, "I never took the silver," he would be required to take an oath required by Scriptural Law that he did not take it. This judgment should be followed universally in all analogous cases.
יד
מעשה באחד שחטף לשון של כסף [ז] מיד חבירו בפני עד אחד. ובא החוטף ואמר חטפתי ושלי חטפתי וחייבוהו חכמים להחזיר מפני שהוא מחוייב שבועה בעד זה ואינו [ח] יכול לישבע שהרי הודה כמו [ט] שאמר העד. ואילו לא היה שם עד כלל היה נשבע שבועת היסת ששלו חטף ואילו הכחיש העד ואמר מעולם לא חטפתי היה נשבע שבועת התורה שלא חטף. וכדין זה דנין בכל כיוצא בזה בכל מקום:
15
The following rules apply if a person seizes gold coins from a colleague and the act was observed by one witness. The defendant says: "I seized my own money. There were twenty gold coins." Although the witness does not know how many coins there were, the defendant must pay twenty coins, for the witness knows that he took gold coins. If two witnesses had observed him, he would have been obligated to pay the full amount. Thus, when there is one witness, he is obligated to take an oath, but cannot, as explained above.
טו
חטף ממנו זהובים [בעד אחד] והוא אומר שלי חטפתי ועשרים היו אע"פ שאין העד יודע כמה חטף הרי זה משלם העשרים שהרי ידע בודאי שזהובים חטף ואילו היו שנים היה חייב לשלם ונמצא בעד אחד מחוייב שבועה ואינו יכול לישבע כמו שביארנו:
16
There are opinions that maintain that the following rule applies when, in the above situation, the person who took the coins said: "I seized twenty gold coins; they were mine," while the person who was robbed says, "He took 100." The defendant must pay the twenty he admitted to having taken, and take an oath required by Scriptural Law with regard to the remainder, for he was obligated for a portion of the plaintiff's claim. My opinion is that he is required merely to take a Rabbinic oath, for he did not admit any liability. Instead, he said that he took what belonged to him.
טז
אמר החוטף עשרים חטפתי ושלי הן והנגזל אומר מאה חטף הואיל ואין העד יודע מניינן הרי משלם העשרים שהודה בהן שחטפן ונשבע שבועת התורה על השאר שהרי נתחייב במקצת. [י] ודעתי נוטה בזה שישבע היסת שהרי לא הודה כלום אלא אמר שלי חטפתי:
17
The following rules apply when a person enters a colleague's home when he is not present and takes utensils, while observed by one witness. The witness does not know how many utensils were taken. The owner claims that he had twenty utensils in his home, while the person who took them states: "I took only ten, and they were my own."
The defendant is required to return the ten, for he is obligated to take an oath, but cannot. He is not required to take even a Rabbinic oath concerning the remainder, because the owner cannot issue a definite claim against the robber.
יז
נכנס לביתו של חבירו שלא בפניו ונטל משם כלים בפני עד אחד ואין העד יודע כמה נטל (הרי) בעל הבית אומר עשרים כלים היו בביתי והגוזל אומר לא נטלתי אלא עשרה והם שלי חייב להחזיר העשרה מפני שהוא מחוייב שבועה ואינו יכול לישבע. ואינו נשבע על השאר אפילו שבועת היסת מפני שאינו יכול לטעון על הגזלן
• Ishut - Chapter Eleven
1
[The following laws apply when a man] weds a virgin who was widowed or divorced or who underwent the rite of chalitzah.1If she was widowed or divorced or underwent the rite of chalitzah after erusin alone, the ketubah [to which she is entitled from her second husband] is 200 zuz. If, however, she had been wed, the ketubah [to which she is entitled from her second husband] is 100 zuz. Once she is wed, she is considered to be a non-virgin.2
Similar [rules apply when a man] weds a virgin [bride] who is [a Canaanite maidservant] who has been freed, who is a convert, or who was held captive [by gentiles and freed]. If the maidservant had been freed, the convert had converted, or the women held captive had been redeemed before they reached the age of three years and one day,3 they are entitled to a ketubah of 200 zuz. If [this took place after they reached that age, their ketubah is [only] 100 [zuz].
א
הנושא בתולה שנתאלמנה או שנתגרשה או נחלצה. אם מן האירוסין נתאלמנה או נתגרשה או נחלצה כתובתה מאתים. ואם מן הנישואין כתובתה מאה. שמשנשאת הרי היא כבעולה. וכן הנושא בתולה משוחררת או גיורת או שבויה אם נשתחררה השפחה ונתגיירה הכותית ונפדית השבויה והן פחותות מבת ג' שנים ויום אחד כתובתן מאתים. ואם היו בנות ג' שנים ויום אחד ומעלה כתובתן מאה:
2
Why did our Sages ordain that these women receive a ketubah of [only] 100 [zuz] even though they are virgins? Because it is a presumption that can be accepted as fact that a woman who is wed will engage in marital relations, and similarly, that a maidservant, a gentile woman and a woman held captive by gentiles will have engaged in relations. Hence, they ordained that such women would be entitled to [only] 100 [zuz],whether they engaged in relations or not. With regard to all matters, they are considered to be non-virgins.
ב
ומפני מה תיקנו חכמים לאלו כתובה מאה ואף ע"פ שהן בתולות הואיל וחזקת הנשואה שתבעל וחזקת השפחה והכותית והשבויה שתבעל תיקנו לאלו מאה בין נבעלו בין לא נבעלו והרי הן כבעולות לכל דבר:
3
A mukat etz4 [is granted] a ketubah of 100 [zuz]. Even if [her husband] wed her under the presumption that she was a virgin and then he discovered that she was a mukat etz, she is entitled to a ketubah of 100 [zuz].5
When a girl of less than three years of age engages in sexual relations, even when her partner is an adult male, she [is entitled to] a ketubah of 200 [zuz]. Ultimately, she will heal and be a virgin like all others.
Similarly, when a boy below the age of nine engages in sexual relations with an adult woman, she [is entitled to] a ketubah of 200 [zuz], as if she had never engaged in relations.6 For it is only after a boy reaches the age of nine years and one day that relations with him are of consequence. Before that age, they are of no consequence.
ג
מוכת עץ כתובתה מאה אפילו נשאת על מנת שהיא בתולה שלימה ונמצאת מוכת עץ כתובתה מאה. קטנה מבת ג' שנים ולמטה שנבעלה אפילו בא עליה אדם גדול כתובתה מאתים סופה שתחזור בתולה כשאר הבתולות. וכן גדולה שבא עליה קטן מבן ט' שנים ולמטה כתובתה מאתים כאילו לא נבעלה כלל שביאת בן תשע שנים ויום אחד ביאתו ביאה פחות מזה אין ביאתו ביאה:
4
Whether a virgin is a bogeret,7, blind,8 or an aylonit,9 she [is entitled to] a ketubah of 200 [zuz]. By contrast, no provision was made for a ketubah for a woman who is a deaf mute or mentally incompetent. [The rationale is] that no provision has been made for the marriage of a mentally incompetent woman at all.
With regard to a woman who is a deaf mute, although our Sages made provision for her marriage, they did not entitle her to a ketubah, so that a man would not refrain from marrying her. Just as she is not entitled to a ketubah, so too, [her husband] is not [obligated to provide] her with her livelihood or grant her any other [of the ordinary] conditions of the marriage contract.
If one wed a woman who was a deaf mute and her difficulty was remedied, she is entitled to a ketubah and to the other conditions of the marriage contract. [The amount of] her ketubah is 100 zuz.10
ד
בתולה שהיא בוגרת או סומא או אילונית כתובתן מאתים. אבל החרשת והשוטה לא תיקנו להן כתובה. השוטה לא תיקנו לה נישואין כלל. והחרשת אע"פ שיש לה נישואין מדבריהם לא תיקנו לה כתובה כדי שלא ימנעו מלשאת אותה. וכשם שאין לה כתובה כך אין לה מזונות ולא תנאי מתנאי כתובה. ואם כנס החרשת ונתפקחה יש לה כתובה ותנאי כתובה וכתובתה מאה:
5
When a man marries a woman who is a deaf mute or mentally incompetent and writes her a ketubah for 10,000 [zuz], the obligation is binding; it was he who desired to diminish his assets.
ה
נשא חרשת או שוטה וכתב להן מאה מנה כתובתן קיימת מפני שרצה להזיק נכסיו:
6
[The following rules apply when] a deaf mute or a mentally incompetent man married a woman who was mentally competent. Even if afterwards the deaf mute's disability disappears and the mentally incompetent person gains stability, they are under no obligation to their wives. If, however, [the men] desire to remain [married] to [the women] after their own wellbeing has been restored, [the wives] are entitled to a ketubah, and its value should be 100 zuz.
If the deaf mute's marriage was made by the court, and they write [his wife] a ketubah against his assets, she is entitled to everything that the court has prescribed for her. A court will not arrange a marriage for a mentally incompetent person at all. Since the sages' injunction will not be maintained in his instance,11 they did not ordain marriage for him at all.
Similarly, our Sages did not ordain marriage for a male below the age of majority; [the rationale is that] ultimately he will gain the potential to enter into a comprehensive marriage bond.
Why then did they ordain marriage for a girl below the age of majority12 although she too will ultimately gain the potential for a comprehensive marriage bond? So that she will not be treated in a wanton manner.13
A youth should not be [allowed to] marry until he has been examined, and it has been determined that he has manifested signs of physical maturity.
ו
חרש או שוטה שנשאו נשים פקחות אעפ"י שנתפקח החרש ונשתפה השוטה אין לנשיהם עליהם כלום. רצו לקיימן אחר שהבריאו יש להן כתובה וכתובתן מאה. ואם בית דין הם שהשיאו החרש וכתבו לה כתובתה על נכסיו נוטלת כל מה שכתבו לה בית דין. אבל השוטה אין בית דין משיאין אותו בכל מקום. ומפני שאין תקנת חכמים עומדת בו לא תיקנו לו נישואין. וכן הקטן לא תיקנו לו חכמים נישואין הואיל וסופו לבוא לידי נישואין גמורין. ומפני מה תיקנו נישואין לקטנה ואע"פ שהיא באה לידי נישואין גמורין. כדי שלא ינהגו בה מנהג הפקר. ואין משיאין את הקטן עד שבודקין אותו ויודעים שהביא סימנין:
7
When a male below the age of majority marries a woman, she is not entitled to a ketubah, even if he is already nine years and one day old. If he attains majority and remains [married] to her, she is entitled to the fundamental requirement of the ketubah.14
Similarly, when a man converts together with his wife, she is entitled to a ketubah [of 100 zuz]. It was with this intent that he maintained their marriage.15
ז
קטן אפילו בן ט' שנים ויום אחד שנשא אשה אין לה כתובה. ואם הגדיל וקיימה אחר שהגדיל יש לה עיקר כתובה. וכן גר שנתגייר הוא ואשתו כתובתה מנה שע"מ כן קיימה:
8
Whenever a virgin bride is entitled to a ketubah of 200 [zuz], there is [the possibility of issuing] a claim against her, [denying] her virginity. Whenever, by contrast, a bride is entitled to a ketubah of [only] 100 [zuz],16 or the Sages did not entitle her to a ketubah at all,17 there is no [possibility of issuing] a claim against her [denying] her virginity. [Similarly,] if [a groom] enters into privacy with his arusah before their wedding, there is no [possibility of issuing] a claim against her [denying] her virginity.18
ח
כל בתולה שכתובתה מאתים יש לה טענת בתולים. וכל שכתובתה מאה או שלא תיקנו לה חכמים כתובה אין לה טענת בתולים. והמתייחד עם ארוסתו קודם נישואין אין לה טענת בתולים:
9
What is meant by a claim [denying a woman's] virginity? [A man] married a woman on the assumption that she was a virgin, and [after the wedding] claims that he did not find signs of virginity. For there are two signs of virginity: a) [hymenal] bleeding at the conclusion of her first sexual experience; b) tightness that is felt during sexual relations at that time.19
ט
ומה היא טענת בתולים. זה שנשא אשה שחזקתה שהיא בתולה וטוען ואומר לא מצאתיה בתולה. ושני סימנין הן לבתולה. האחד דמים ששותתין ממנה בסוף ביאה ראשונה. והשני הדוחק שימצא בה בביאה ראשונה בשעת תשמיש:
10
When [a man] weds a virgin who is granted a ketubah of 200 [zuz], and claims that he did not discover signs of her virginity, the woman is questioned [regarding the matter]. If she says, "It is true that he did not find me a virgin, but this is because I fell, and I was struck by a piece of wood or the ground, and my hymen was damaged," her word is accepted and she is entitled to a ketubah of [100 zuz].20
י
הנושא את הבתולה שכתובתה מאתים וטען ואמר לא מצאתיה בתולה. שואלין אותה אם אמרה אמת הוא לא מצאני בתולה מפני שנפלתי והכני עץ או קרקע והלכו בתולי הרי זו נאמנת ותחזור כתובתה למנה. אע"פ שהוא טוען ואומר שמא איש בא עליך ואין לך כלום אין משגיחין בטענתו. ויש לו להחרים סתם שלא בא עליה איש שאין הדבר ודאי לו:
11
If [the woman] says, "It is true that he did not find me a virgin, for another man raped me after I had been consecrated by him," her word is accepted, and she is entitled to a ketubah of 200 [zuz] as before.23
If [her husband] claims: "Perhaps you were raped before you were consecrated, and the agreement I entered was based on false premises. Or perhaps you willingly engaged in relations after you were consecrated" [his claim is not accepted]. He may, however, have a ban of ostracism issued conditionally against anyone who makes a false claim to have him incur a financial obligation for which he is not liable.
יא
אמרה היא אמת אמר שלא מצאני בתולה ואיש בא עלי באונס אחר שנתארסתי לו. הרי זו נאמנת וכתובתה מאתים כמו שהיתה. ואם טען ואמר שמא עד שלא ארסתיך נאנסת ומקחי מקח טעות או אחר שארסתיך נבעלת ברצונך. הרי זה מחרים סתם על מי שטוען שקר כדי לחייבני ממון שאיני חייב בו:
12
If he claims, "I did not find her a virgin," and she claims, "He has not had intercourse with me and I am still a virgin," she should be examined. Alternatively, he should have relations with her under the surveillance of witnesses [and the truth will be clarified].24
If she claims, "He had relations with me and he found me a virgin like all others, and his claim is false," he is questioned [and asked to clarify his statements]. We ask him: "Why do you say that she was not a virgin?" If he answers: "Because she did not have hymenal bleeding," we check her family [history]. Perhaps [the women of] this [family] are known not to have [vaginal] bleeding at all: neither menstrual bleeding nor hymenal bleeding. If this was found to be true, we presume [that she was a virgin, and she is entitled to a ketubah of 200 zuz].
If the women in her family are not known to have such a condition, we check her [physical state]; perhaps she is afflicted by a serious infirmity that has parched her body's natural fluids, or [perhaps] she was afflicted by hunger. Therefore, we have her bathe, eat and drink until she becomes healthy. At which point, [the couple] engage in relations again to see if she manifests hymenal bleeding or not.
If she is not hampered by sickness, hunger or the like, the [husband's] claim that she was not a virgin [is accepted]. [This applies] even if he felt tightness during relations. Since there was no hymenal bleeding, her hymen was not intact. For every virgin will manifest hymenal bleeding, whether she is a minor or above the age of majority, whether a na'arah or a bogeret, unless [this is prevented by an external factor,] illness or the like, as explained.
If [the husband] said: "[I claim that she was not a virgin,] because I did not feel tightness [during intercourse]. Instead, I found an open passageway," we inquire with regard to [the woman's] age. Perhaps she is a bogeret, and most bogrot do not have tightness that can be felt substantially [during intercourse], for as she grew older [the adhesion of] her limbs lessened, and the virginal [tightness] disappeared.
If she had not become a bogeret yet, we ask him: "Perhaps you leaned on the side or [entered] gently25 during intercourse, and therefore you did not feel any tightness?" If he replies: "No. I found an open passageway," [his] claim that she was not a virgin [is accepted] with regard to any woman who has not reached the age of bagrut, regardless of whether she was a minor or a na'arah, or whether she was healthy or sick. For the vaginal channel of every virgin is closed. Even if she manifests hymenal bleeding, she is not considered to be a virgin, because the vaginal channel was open.26
יב
טען ואמר לא מצאתיה בתולה והיא אומרת לא בא עלי ועדיין אני בתולה בודקין. אותה או חוזר ובועל בפני עדים. אמרה בא עלי ובתולה מצאני ככל הבתולות ושקר הוא טוען. שואלין אותו ואומרין לו מה היה הדבר עד שאמרת שאינה בתולה. אם אמר מפני שלא מצאתי לה דם בודקין במשפחתה שמא אין להם דם כלל לא דם נדה ולא דם בתולים אם נמצאו כולן כן הרי זו בחזקתה. לא נמצאו בנות משפחתה כן בודקין אותה שמא חולי גדול יש בה שיבש לחלוחית האיברים או שהיתה מתענת ברעב. מרטיבין אותה ומאכילין אותה ומשקין אותה עד שתבריא ותבעל שנית ונראה אם תוציא דם אם לאו. ואם אין שם חולי ולא רעב ולא כיוצא בו הרי זו טענת בתולים. ואע"פ שמצא דוחק בעת תשמיש הואיל ולא יצא דם אין כאן בתולים. שכל בתולה יש לה דם בין קטנה בין גדולה בין נערה בין בוגרת אלא מפני החולי כמו שביארנו. ואם אמר מפני שלא מצאתי דוחק אלא פתח פתוח מצאתי שואלין על שנותיה שמא בוגרת היא שרוב הבוגרות אין להן דוחק שמרגישין בו הרבה שהרי גדלה ונתרפו איבריה וכלו בתוליה. ואם לא בגרה עדיין אומרין לו שמא הטיתה או בעלתה בנחת ולפיכך לא הרגשת בדוחק. אם אמר לא כי אלא ודאי פתח פתוח היה הרי זו טענת בתולים לכל בתולה שלא בגרה בין קטנה בין נערה בין בריאה בין חולה שכל נערה בתולה פתחה סתום הוא. ואף ע"פ שיצא הדם הואיל ומצא פתח פתוח אין כאן בתולים:
13
There are geonim who rule that for a bogeret, the claim that she did not have hymenal bleeding is not valid, but the claim that her vaginal channel was open is valid. This does not appear [to be based on the proper text of] the Talmud. They had inaccurate versions of the text. I have investigated many texts, including those of an early era,27 and I have discovered the version to be as I ruled. For a bogeret, the only valid claim is [that she did not manifest] hymenal bleeding.28
יג
יש גאונים שהורו שהבוגרת אין לה טענת דמים ויש לה טענת פתח פתוח. ואין דרך הגמרא מראה דבר זה וטעות היה בנוסחאות שלהם. וכבר בדקתי על ספרים רבים וקדמונים ומצאתי שהדבר כמו שביארנו שאין לבוגרת אלא טענת דמים בלבד:
14
Our Sages were those who instituted the fundamental requirement of a marriage contract for a woman and they also instituted [the following consideration]: Whenever [a man] makes a claim that his wife was not a virgin, and the woman disputes his claim, [the husband's claim] is accepted. It is the woman's responsibility to bring support for her claim, not the man's. [The rationale is] that we assume that a man will not labor to prepare a [wedding] feast and then mar it, turning his celebration into mourning.29
יד
חכמים הם שתיקנו עיקר כתובה לאשה והם התקינו ואמרו שכל הטוען טענת בתולים והאשה מכחשת אותו נאמן ועליה להביא ראיה לא על האיש. שחזקה היא שאין אדם טורח בסעודה ומפסידה והופך שמחתו אבל:
15
Until when may a husband issue a claim denying his wife's virginity? If [the couple] went into privacy, only immediately [thereafter].30 If they did not enter into privacy, he has this option even after 30 days.
טו
ועד מתי יש לו לטעון טענת בתולים. אם נסתרה מיד. ואם לא נסתרה אפילו לאחר שלשים יום:
16
All the geonim have ruled that our Sages' statement that the husband's statements are accepted even though his wife disputes his claim applies only with regard to nullifying the obligation for the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract. Nevertheless, the woman is entitled to the additional amount [to which her husband committed himself]31 unless there is clear proof that she was not a virgin, or she admitted that she was not a virgin before she was consecrated and that she deceived him.
Therefore, [the husband] may require her to take an oath while holding a sacred article,32 as must be done by all others who must take oaths before they collect [the money due them].33 Afterwards, she may collect the additional sum.
She, by contrast, does not have the option of requiring him to take an oath that he did not discover her to be a virgin, before she must forfeit the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract, for it is a presumption accepted as fact that a person will not labor to prepare a [wedding] feast and then mar it. She may, however, have a ban of ostracism issued conditionally, applying to anyone who lodges false claims against her.
טז
הורו כל הגאונים שזה שאמרו חכמים שהוא נאמן אם הכחישתו אשתו להפסידה. עיקר הכתובה אבל התוספת יש לה. אלא אם כן נודע בראיה ברורה שהיתה בעולה או שהודה לו שהיא בעולה קודם שתתארס והטעתו. לפיכך יש לו להשביעה בנקיטת חפץ כדין כל הנשבעין ונוטלין ואחר כך תגבה התוספת. ואין לה להשביעו שלא מצאה בתולה ואחר כך תפסיד עיקר כתובה שחזקה היא שאין אדם טורח בסעודה ומפסידה. ויש לה להחרים סתם על מי שטען עליה שקר:
17
If [the husband] desires to remain married to [his wife] after causing her to forfeit the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract, he must write her [a new ketubah for] 100 [zuz]. For it is forbidden for a man to live with his wife for even one moment without a ketubah, as we have explained.34
יז
הרי שרצה לקיימה אחר שהפסידה עיקר הכתובה חוזר וכותב לה מאה. לפי שאסור לאדם לשהות עם אשתו שעה אחת בלא כתובה כמו שביארנו:
FOOTNOTES
1.
I.e., the woman had been consecrated or wed, but before she and her husband engaged in marital relations, she was either widowed or divorced.
2.
Even if there are witnesses to the fact that her husband died directly after they entered the chuppah (Ketubot 11a).
3.
The rationale is that even if a woman engaged in sexual relations before the age of three, her hymen will grow back, as stated in Halachah 3, based on Ketubot 11b.
4.
Literally, "one struck by a piece of wood," a woman who claims that she did not have hymenal bleeding at the time of her first sexual experience, because she had previously been "struck by a piece of wood" and caused to bleed at that time. As mentioned in Halachah 10, the term is used to refer to any woman who claims that her failure to have hymenal bleeding resulted from causes other than intercourse.
5.
Although one might think that the marriage would be annulled, because the husband was operating under a misconception (מקח טעות), Ketubot 11b rules that this is not so. As long as she had not engaged in sexual relations previously, their marriage is binding.
6.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 67:4) follows the ruling of Tosafot, Ketubot 11b, who explain that this law applies only when the woman's hymen remains intact despite these relations.
7.
This point is necessary to mention because of the factors stated in Halachah 12.
8.
Ketubot 36b explains that we are afraid that such a woman might have suffered hymenal bleeding from causes other than intercourse, but will not have noticed the fact.
9.
Rashi (Ketubot 36a) explains that since an aylonit is considered a bogeret, this point must be clarified, as it must with regard to a bogeret. The above ruling applies only when the husband was aware that the woman was an aylonit. If he was not aware of that fact, the woman is not entitled to a ketubah at all, as explained in Chapter 24, Halachah 2.
10.
Even if she was a virgin at the time of their original marriage, at present she is not a virgin.
11.
I.e., a marriage between a mentally incompetent man and an ordinary woman will constantly be pained by strife and will not last. In contrast, a deaf mute is more passive, and his household will not necessarily be characterized by friction (Yevamot 112b).
12.
This refers to a girl who has been orphaned of her father, or who was divorced after being wed. The Torah - and not our Sages - gives a father the right to consecrate his daughter before she becomes a na'arah.
13.
If the girl remains unmarried, the prohibitions against relations with her are not as severe, and the Sages feared that they would not be upheld. If she were allowed to marry, the prohibition against adultery would be respected, and she would be treated differently. Moreover, her husband will guard against her association with other men.
14.
I.e., only the fundamental requirements of the ketubah, but not any additional amount that the youth added to the marriage contract, unless he renews that commitment after he reaches majority. Otherwise, that commitment - like any commitment made by a minor - is of no substance. Moreover, he is obligated for the fundamental requirement of the ketubah only when he engaged in marital relations with his wife after he attained majority. If not, the marriage - and thus the marriage contract - is of no consequence.
With regard to the fundamental requirements of the ketubah, the Rambam writes in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 9:8) that she is entitled to either 200 or 100 zuz, depending on her status at the time of the wedding.
15.
Rabbenu Asher differs and maintains that the laws applying to a convert are the same as those applying to a minor. Both opinions are alluded to by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 67:11). (See the Beit Shmuel 67:12, which explains the Rambam's position: Even if a convert made a commitment of more than 100 zuz to his wife, any sum above 100 zuz is considered to be an addition to the ketubah and is therefore no longer binding when the convert accepts his new status as a Jew.)
16.
I.e., even a woman who was widowed after the wedding, before engaging in relations with her husband. Even though her second husband marries her under the impression that she is a virgin, there is no possibility of issuing such a claim against her.
17.
The obligation to grant a virgin bride a ketubah of 200 zuz is Rabbinic in origin. At the same time that our Sages instituted that obligation, they granted the husband a safeguard: that his word would be accepted with regard to a claim denying the woman's virginity. In these instances, since the woman was not granted the additional money, the safeguard provided by the Sages also does not apply (Maggid Mishneh).
18.
We suspect that the groom had relations with her and later forgot the matter (Rashi, Ketubot 9b). See also note 30.
19.
As stated in the following halachot, unless there are other factors that support the woman's position, as will be explained, the husband's claim is accepted. We assume that the husband would not go to the time and expense of preparing a wedding feast and then mar the celebration by denying his wife's virginity unless the claim were true (Ketubot 10a).
20.
Unless there are witnesses who can testify that the woman engaged in relations previously, the only question before the court is the amount of the woman's ketubah. She is permitted to remain married to her husband, because there is no proof that she willingly engaged in sexual relations with another person after she was consecrated. (See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 18:10.)
An exception to the above is a woman married to a priest. Issuing a claim questioning her virginity places the entire foundation of their marriage in doubt.
21.
I.e., the husband claims that he has entered into a mekach ta'ut, an agreement based on false premises. He had desired to marry a virgin, and he was not prepared to marry a woman who had had relations with another man. Therefore, he desires to have the marriage annulled entirely.
22.
I.e., he is not certain that she had engaged in relations with another man. In all matters of Torah law, whenever one person has a claim that is absolute (bari, in this instance the woman's claim that her hymen was damaged by factors other than intercourse) and one that is not absolute (shema, the man's claim), the claim that is absolute is accepted.
23.
Since she was raped against her will, she is not forced to suffer a loss and is entitled to the full amount of the ketubah.
24.
The intent is not that witnesses should observe the couple engaging in relations. This is forbidden, as stated in Chapter 14, Halachah 16. Instead, the intent is that they should inspect the sheet before and after the couple engage in relations for signs of hymenal bleeding.
25.
Other authorities (and their opinion is quoted in the Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 68:6) state: "Maybe you did not enter gently?" - i.e., because of the husband's hurry to complete the sexual act, he did not feel the tightness.
The Ramah (loc. cit.) quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who states that the claim: "I discovered an open passageway," can be made only by a man who has been married before. If he was not married before, he would not have the experience to know the difference between virginal tightness and a non-virgin's state.
26.
The Ramban and the Rashba state that the claim that the woman's vaginal channel was open can be made only in an instance in which the sheet on which the couple had relations was lost. If, however, the sheet is available, it should be inspected. If it has signs of blood, she is considered a virgin; and if not, she is not. This opinion is mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), but does not appear to have been accepted.
27.
See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 15:2, where the Rambam states that he had available texts of the Talmud that were almost 500 years old. These would have been written approximately 200 years after the time of the Talmud's composition.
28.
The Rambam's ruling is substantiated by our text of the Talmud (Ketubot 36b) and the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 68:3). The differing opinion mentioned by the Rambam is that of Rabbenu Chanan'el.
29.
Based on this rationale, the Maggid Mishneh mentions opinions that state that the man's word is accepted only when he prepared the wedding feast. If he did not, the woman's word is accepted.
30.
We assume that the couple had relations and he discovered her to be a virgin. The fact that he issued a claim against her afterwards stemmed from discontent for other reasons, without any connection to her personal state.
31.
Although there are authorities (among them Rabbenu Asher) who offer reasons why the husband's word should be accepted in this instance as well, the prevailing view (and the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 68:8) follows the Rambam's decision. The rationale is that the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract is a Rabbinic injunction, and the same authority that obligated the husband to meet this requirement rescinded it when he lodged a claim denying her virginity. The additional amount, by contrast, is a present to which the husband voluntarily obligated himself, and that obligation may be nullified only if it is proven that it was made under false premises.
32.
See Hilchot Sh'vuot 11:8, which states that such an oath is administered while the person is holding a Torah scroll. Significantly, the Rambam's ruling here represents a change of mind from his statements in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 1:3), where he states that in such a situation the woman is required to take merely a sh'vuat hesset, a less severe oath.
33.
I.e., the situation is analogous to a person who holds a promissory note and may be asked to take an oath that it is valid before he can collect it, as explained in Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 14:2-3.
34.
Chapter 10, Halachah 10.
Ishut - Chapter Twelve
1
When a man marries a woman, whether she is a virgin or a non-virgin, whether she is above the age of majority or a minor, and whether she was born Jewish, is a convert or a freed slave, he incurs ten responsibilities toward her and receives four privileges.1
א
כשנושא אדם אשה בין בתולה בין בעולה בין גדולה בין קטנה אחת בת ישראל ואחת הגיורת או המשוחררת יתחייב לה בעשרה דברים ויזכה בארבעה דברים:
2
With regard to his ten responsibilities: three stem from the Torah. They include sha'arah, kesutah v'onatah.2 Sha'arah means providing her with subsistence.3 Kesutah means supplying her with garments, and onatah refers to conjugal rights.
The seven responsibilities ordained by the Rabbis are all conditions [of the marriage contract] established by the court. The first is the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract. The others are referred to as t'na'ei ketubah, the conditions of the marriage contract. They are:
a) to provide medical treatment if she becomes sick;
b) to redeem her if she is held captive:
c) to bury her if she dies;
d) the right for her to continue living in his home after his death as long as she remains a widow;
e) the right for her daughters to receive their subsistence from his estate after his death until they become consecrated;
f) the right for her sons to inherit her ketubah in addition to their share in her husband's estate together with their brothers [borne by other wives, if she dies before her husband does].
ב
והעשרה שלשה מהן מן התורה ואלו הן. שארה. כסותה. ועונתה. שארה אלו מזונותיה. כסותה כמשמעו. עונתה לבא עליה כדרך כל הארץ. והשבעה מדברי סופרים וכולן תנאי בית דין הם. האחד מהם עיקר כתובה. והשאר הם הנקראין תנאי כתובה ואלו הן. לרפאתה אם חלתה. ולפדותה אם נשבית. לקוברה אם מתה. ולהיות נזונת מן נכסיו. ויושבת בביתו אחר מותו כל זמן אלמנותה. ולהיות בנותיה ממנו ניזונות מנכסיו אחרי מותו עד שתתארסנה. ולהיות בניה הזכרים ממנו יורשין כתובתה יותר על חלקם בירושה שעם אחיהם:
3
The four privileges that the husband is granted are all Rabbinic in origin. They are:
a) the right to the fruits of her labor;
b) the right to any ownerless object she discovers;
c) the right to benefit from the profits of her property during her lifetime;
d) the right to inherit her [property] if she dies during his lifetime. His rights to her property supersede [the rights of] all others.4
ג
והארבעה שזוכה בהן כולם מדברי סופרים ואלו הן. להיות מעשה ידיה שלו. ולהיות מציאתה שלו. ושיהיה אוכל כל פירות נכסיה בחייה. ואם מתה בחייו יירשנה. והוא קודם לכל אדם בירושה:
4
Our Sages also ordained that the fruits of a wife's labor should parallel her subsistence, [the obligation to] redeem her should parallel [the right to] the benefit from her property, and [the obligation to] bury her should parallel [the right to] inherit [the property mentioned in] her ketubah.
Therefore, if a woman says: "I will not [hold you obligated for] my subsistence, but I will not work,"5 she is given this option, and she cannot be compelled to work.6 If, however, her husband says: "I will not provide for your subsistence, and I will not receive the right to the fruits of your labor," he is not given this option, lest the woman be unable to earn her subsistence.7 Because of this institution, [the obligation to provide for a woman's] subsistence is considered to be one of the t'na'ei ketubah.8
ד
ועוד תקנו חכמים שיהיו מעשה ידי האשה כנגד מזונותיה. ופדיונה כנגד אכילת פירות נכסיה. וקבורתה כנגד ירושתו לכתובתה. לפיכך אם אמרה האשה איני ניזונית ואיני עושה שומעין לה ואין כופין אותה. אבל אם אמר הבעל איני זנך ואיני נוטל כלום ממעשה ידיך אין שומעין לו שמא לא יספקו לה מעשה ידיה במזונותיה. ומפני תקנה זו יחשבו המזונות מתנאי הכתובה:
5
Whether or not these matters were written in the marriage contract - indeed, even if a marriage contract was not written and the couple merely married - once they marry, the husband is granted the four privileges mentioned, and the woman is granted the ten rights mentioned. There is no need to state them explicitly.9
ה
כל הדברים האלו אף ע"פ שלא נכתבו בשטר הכתובה ואפילו לא כתבו כתובה אלא נשא סתם כיון שנשאה זכה בארבעה דברים שלו וזכתה האשה בעשרה דברים שלה ואינן צריכין לפרש:
6
If the husband made a stipulation that he would not be responsible for one of these obligations - or the wife made a stipulation that [her husband] would not be granted one of these privileges - [and the other party agreed,] the stipulation is binding,10with the exception of three matters with regard to which it is impossible for a stipulation to be made. Indeed, if a stipulation is made with regard to these three matters, it is of no consequence. These [three] are: [the woman's] conjugal rights, the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract and [the husband's right] to inherit [his wife's property].
ו
התנה הבעל שלא יתחייב באחד מן הדברים שהוא חייב בהן. או שהתנת האשה שלא יזכה הבעל באחד מן הדברים שהוא זוכה בהם התנאי קיים חוץ משלשה דברים שאין התנאי מועיל בהן. וכל המתנה עליהן תנאו בטל. ואלו הן. עונתה. ועיקר כתובתה. וירושתה:
7
What is implied? If [the groom] made a stipulation with his bride that he is not obligated to give her conjugal rights, his stipulation is of no substance. For he has made a stipulation against what is written in the Torah, and the stipulation does not concern financial matters.11
ז
כיצד התנה עם האשה שאין לה עליו עונה תנאו בטל וחייב בעונתה. שהרי התנה על מ"ש בתורה ואינו תנאי ממון:
8
When a man makes a stipulation to reduce the amount of the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract - or he writes a ketubah for either 200 or 100 [zuz], but she writes that she has already received a portion of the sum, when in fact she did not12 - his stipulation is of no substance.13 For whenever a person establishes a marriage contract with a virgin for less than 200 [zuz] or with a non-virgin for less than 100 [zuz], the sexual relations [he conducts with his wife] are considered promiscuous.14
ח
התנה עמה לפחות מעיקר כתובה או שכתב לה מאתים או מאה עיקר כתובה וכתבה לו שנתקבלה מהן כך וכך והיא לא נתקבלה תנאו בטל שכל הפוחת לבתולה ממאתים ולאלמנה ממאה הרי בעילתו בעילת זנות:
9
If he makes a stipulation after he weds her15 that he will not inherit her property, his stipulation is of no consequence. Although the husband's [right to] inherit [his wife's property] is a rabbinic institution, [our Sages] reinforced their edict, [giving it the power of a statute of] the Torah.
With regard to [the Torah's statutes of] inheritance, all stipulations that are made are of no consequence, despite the fact that financial matters are concerned, as [derived from Numbers 27:11]: "the statutes of judgment."16
With regard to other [aspects of the marriage contract], a stipulation [made by the husband and accepted by his wife] is binding. For example, if he made a stipulation that he is not obligated to supply her with her subsistence or with clothing, or that he would not receive the benefits from her property, his stipulation is binding.
ט
התנה עמה אחר שנשאה שלא יירשנה תנאו בטל ואף ע"פ שירושת הבעל מדברי סופרים עשו חיזוק לדבריהם כשל תורה. וכל תנאי שבירושה בטל ואע"פ שהוא ממון שנאמר בה לחוקת משפט. ובשאר הדברים תנאו קיים כגון שהתנה עמה שאין לה שאר וכסות. על מנת שלא יאכל פירות נכסיה וכל כיוצא בזה. תנאו קיים:
10
What is the amount that is designated for a woman's subsistence? We allot her bread for two meals every day, according to the norm of the people of her town, for a person who is neither sick nor a glutton.
The allotment is also made according to the type of bread eaten as a staple in that locale, be it wheat or barley, or rice, millet, or other grains, as is customary [in that locale]. Similarly, she is allotted other foods that are eaten together with bread - i.e., legumes, vegetables and the like. [She is also allotted] oil for food and to light a lamp and also fruit. She is also [allotted] a small amount of wine, if it is the local custom for women to drink wine.
י
כמה מזונות פוסקין לאשה פוסקין לה לחם שתי סעודות בכל יום סעודה בינונית של כל אדם באותה העיר כאדם שאינו לא חולה ולא גרגרן ומאותו מאכל של אנשי אותה העיר. אם חטים חטים ואם שעורים שעורים. וכן אורז ודוחן או משאר מינין שנהגו בהן. ופוסקין לה פרפרת לאכול בה את הפת כגון קטנית או ירקות וכיוצא בהן. ושמן לאכילה ושמן להדלקת הנר ופירות ומעט יין לשתות אם היה מנהג המקום שישתו הנשים יין. ופוסקין לה שלש סעודות בשבת ובשר או דגים כמנהג המקום. ונותן לה בכל שבת ושבת מעה כסף לצרכיה כגון פרוטה לכבוס או למרחץ וכיוצא בהן:
11
To whom does the above apply? To a poor Jewish man. But if the husband is wealthy, [the support he is required to provide his wife is apportioned] according to his wealth. If he is wealthy enough to provide her with several dishes of meat each day, he is compelled to do so, and she is allotted [subsistence] commensurate with his wealth.
יא
במה דברים אמורים בעני שבישראל אבל אם היה עשיר הכל לפי עשרו. אפילו היה ממונו ראוי לעשות לה כמה תבשילי בשר בכל יום כופין אותו ופוסקין לה מזונות כפי ממונו. ואם היה עני ביותר ואינו יכול ליתן לה אפי' לחם שהיא צריכה לו כופין אותו להוציא ותהיה כתובתה חוב עליו עד שתמצא ידו ויתן:
12
יב
בעל שרצה ליתן לאשתו מזונותיה הראויות לה ותהיה אוכלת ושותה לעצמה והוא שותה ואוכל לעצמו הרשות בידו ובלבד שיאכל עמה מלילי שבת ללילי שבת:
13
When a woman has been allotted subsistence, and [the entire allotment was not used], the remainder belongs to her husband.23
If her husband is a priest, he is not entitled to provide her with all her provisions from terumah. [He is not given this option] because it is very difficult for her to protect [the terumah] from contacting ritual impurity, and to eat it while ritually pure [herself].24 Instead, he should give her half her provisions from ordinary [food] and half from terumah.
יג
האשה שפסקו לה מזונות והותירו המותר לבעל. היה בעלה כהן אינו נותן לה כל מזונותיה תרומה מפני שטורח גדול הוא לה לשמרן מדברים המטמאין ולאכלן בטהרה אלא נותן לה מחצה חולין ומחצה תרומה:
14
Just as a man is required to provide his wife with her subsistence, he is required to provide for the maintenance of his children, both male and female, until they reach the age of six.25Afterwards, he should continue to provide for their maintenance until they reach majority, as ordained by our Sages.26
If, however, he does not, he should be rebuked and embarrassed publicly, and appeals should be made to him. If he [persists in his] refusal, a public announcement is made with regard to him: "So and so is cruel and does not desire to provide for the maintenance of his children. He is worse than an impure bird, which does provide for its chicks." Nevertheless, he should not be compelled to provide for the maintenance [of children] six and older.
יד
כשם שאדם חייב במזונות אשתו כך הוא חייב במזונות בניו ובנותיו הקטנים עד שיהיו בני שש שנים. מכאן ואילך מאכילן עד שיגדלו כתקנת חכמים. ואם לא רצה גוערין בו ומכלימין אותו ופוצרין בו. ואם לא רצה מכריזין עליו בציבור ואומרים פלוני אכזרי הוא ואינו רוצה לזון בניו והרי פחות הוא מעוף טמא שהוא זן את אפרוחיו. ואין כופין אותו לזונם אחר שש:
15
To what does the above apply? To a person who is not known to have resources, and it is not known whether or not he is capable of giving charity. If, however, he has resources and he possesses the means to give an amount to charity that would provide for [his children's] needs, his property is expropriated against his will27 for the purposes of charity,28 and [his children's] needs are provided for until they reach majority.
טו
בד"א באיש שאינו אמוד ואין ידוע אם ראוי ליתן צדקה או אינו ראוי אבל אם היה אמוד שיש לו ממון הראוי ליתן ממנו צדקה המספקת להן מוציאין ממנו בעל כרחו משום צדקה וזנין אותן עד שיגדלו:
16
When a person travels to another country [and leaves his wife behind], [the following rules apply] should his wife come to court to place a claim [against her husband] for her subsistence. For the first three months from the day her husband departed, she is not given an allotment for her subsistence. [The rationale is that] it is an accepted assumption that a person does not depart without leaving provisions for his household.29
Afterwards,30 an allotment is made for her subsistence. If her husband owns property, the court expropriates his property and sells it to provide for his wife's subsistence. [When doing so,] no account is made for his wife's earnings until her husband comes.31If it is discovered that she earned [money during the time that he was away], he is granted that sum.
Moreover, even if the matter is not taken to court, and instead the woman sells [her husband's property] on her own32 in order to pay for her subsistence, the sale is binding. There is no need for a public announcement [regarding the sale of the property].33Similarly, the woman is not required to take an oath [that her husband did not leave her money] until her husband comes and lodges a claim [against her], or until she comes to claim [the money due her, as stated in her] ketubah in the event of her husband's death. [In the latter instance, together with the oaths she is required to take to collect her ketubah,]34 on the basis of the principle of gilgul shevu'ah,35 [she is also required to take an oath] that she did not sell [any more of her husband's property than] was necessary for her subsistence.
טז
מי שהלך למדינה אחרת ובאה אשתו לב"ד לתבוע מזונות. שלשה חדשים הראשונים מיום הליכתו אין פוסקין לה בהן מזונות שחזקה שאין אדם מניח ביתו ריקן מכאן ואילך פוסקין לה מזונות. ואם היו לו נכסים ב"ד יורדין לנכסיו ומוכרין למזונותיה. ואין מחשבין עמה על מעשה ידיה עד שיבא בעלה אם מצאה שעשתה הרי אלו שלו. וכן אם לא עמדה בדין אלא מכרה לעצמה למזונות מכרה קיים ואינה צריכה הכרזה ולא שבועה עד שיבא בעלה ויטעון או עד שתבוא לגבות כתובתה אחר מותו מגלגלין עליה שלא מכרה אלא למזונות שהיא צריכה להן:
17
Just as the court [expropriates and] sells [the property of] a husband who travelled [to another country to provide for] the subsistence of [his] wife, so too, it [expropriates and] sells property to provide for the subsistence of his sons and daughters who are six years old or less. If, however, they are more than six [years old], [the court] does not provide for their subsistence from his property when he is not present, even when he is reputed to have means.36
Similarly, when a person loses his mental faculties, the court expropriates his property and sells it to provide subsistence and other necessities for his wife and his children below the age of six.37
יז
וכשם שב"ד מוכרין למזון האשה שהלך בעלה כך מוכרין למזון בניו ובנותיו כשהן בני שש שנים או פחות. אבל יתר על שש אינן זנין אותן מנכסיו שלא בפניו אע"פ שהוא אמוד. וכן מי שנשתטה ב"ד יורדין לנכסיו ומוכרים וזנין אשתו ובניו ובנותיו שהן בני שש שנים או פחות ומפרנסין אותן:
18
Some geonim ruled that an assessment should not be made for the subsistence of a woman whose husband journeyed overseas, or who died, unless she evinces possession of her ketubah document. If she does not evince possession of her ketubah, she is not entitled to subsistence. Perhaps she has already received payment for her ketubah from her husband, or perhaps she forfeited her ketubah in his favor, as will be explained.38 Others maintain that an assessment is made on her behalf for her subsistence, for we accept it as a presumption that she neither received payment for nor forfeited [her ketubah]. Hence, she is not required to show her ketubah [when presenting her claim].
I favor [the latter view] with regard to [a woman] whose husband has departed,39 since her claim to her subsistence stems from the Torah itself.40 With regard to a woman whose husband died, however, she is not entitled to her subsistence until she brings her ketubah, for she [derives her subsistence] by virtue of a rabbinic enactment. Furthermore, her subsistence is paid from property belonging to [her husband's] heirs, and [the court] always advances claims in support of the interests of an heir.41
יח
יש מן הגאונים שהורה שאין פוסקין מזונות לאשה שהלך בעלה למדינת הים או שמת בעלה עד שיהא שטר כתובה יוצא מתחת ידה. ואם לא תוציא שטר כתובה אין לה מזונות שמא נטלה כתובתה מבעלה או מחלה לו כתובתה שאין לה מזונות כמו שיתבאר. ויש מי שהורה שפוסקין לה מזונות בחזקת שלא נטלה ולא מחלה ואין מצריכין אותה להביא כתובה. ודעתי נוטה לזה במי שהלך בעלה הואיל ויש לה מזונות מן התורה. אבל אם מת בעלה אין לה מזונות עד שתביא כתובה. מפני שהיא אוכלת בתקנת חכמים ועוד שניזונת מנכסי יורשים ולעולם טוענין ליורש:
19
If [a woman's] husband departed on a journey, and she borrowed money for her subsistence, [her husband] is required to pay [the debt] when he returns.42
If a person voluntarily took the initiative of providing for her subsistence, when [her husband] returns the husband is not required to pay [that person]. The other person forfeited his money, [the rationale being] that [the husband] did not instruct him to provide for her, nor did she [request the assistance] as a loan.43
יט
הלך בעלה ולותה ואכלה כשיבוא חייב לשלם. עמד אחד מדעת עצמו וזנה משלו אם יבוא הבעל אינו חייב לשלם לו והרי זה איבד את מעותיו מפני שלא צוהו לזונה והיא לא לותה ממנו:
20
When a husband [who plans to] depart on a journey tells his wife: "Use your earnings to purchase your subsistence," she has no [right to demand] her subsistence [from him afterwards]. For if she had not accepted this agreement, and she had not felt confident, she could have issued a claim against him, or told him, "My earnings are not sufficient for me."44
כ
הבעל שאמר לאשתו בשעה שהלך טלי מעשה ידייך במזונותייך אין לה מזונות שאילו לא רצתה בדבר זה ולא סמכה דעתה היה לה לתובעו או לומר לו אין מעשה ידי מספיקין לי:
21
[The following rule applies if] the woman took the matter to court and was awarded an assessment for her subsistence, the court sold [her husband's landed property] and gave her [the proceeds] - or she sold [the property] herself - and afterwards, the husband came and claimed that he left provisions for her. She is required to take an oath, while holding a sacred article, that he did not make provisions for her [and then she is not held liable].
[The following rule applies when a husband departed on a journey, and the woman] did not take the matter to court, nor sell his property, but instead waited until he returned. [If upon his return there is a dispute,] he claims: "I made [provisions for you]," while she claims, "You did not make provisions. Instead, I borrowed money from this person to provide for myself," he is required to take a rabbinic oath45 that he left provisions for her, and then he is not held liable. She remains responsible for the debt.46
כא
הרי שעמדה בדין ופסקו לה מזונות ומכרו בית דין ונתנו לה. או שמכרה היא לעצמה ובא הבעל ואמר הנחתי לה מזונות הרי זו נשבעת בנקיטת חפץ שלא הניח לה. לא תבעה ולא מכרה אלא שהתה עד שבא הוא אומר הנחתי והיא אומרת לא הנחת אלא לויתי מזה ונתפרנסתי נשבע שבועת היסת שהניח לה ונפטר וישאר החוב עליה:
22
[In the above instance,] if she sold movable property, claiming that she sold it to provide for her subsistence, and her husband claimed that he had left provisions for her, she is required to take a rabbinic oath that he did not leave her any provisions.47
If she did not issue a claim against him, did not borrow money, and she did not sell his property, but instead strained herself during the day and during the night and earned her livelihood, she is not entitled to any recompense.48
כב
מכרה מטלטלין ואמרה למזונות מכרתי והוא טוען ואומר מזונותייך הנחתי נשבעת שבועת היסת שלא הניח. הרי שלא תבעה ולא לותה ולא מכרה אלא דחקה עצמה ביום ובלילה ועשתה ואכלה אין לה כלום:
23
[The following rules apply when] a man takes a vow that his wife should not derive any benefit from him [or his property]. Whether he specified the span of the vow or did not specify the span of the vow, we grant him an interval of thirty days.49 If the span of his vow is concluded, or even though it is not concluded, but he has his vow annulled, this is acceptable. If not, he must divorce his wife,50 and pay her [the money due her because of] her ketubah.
During those thirty days, she should work and [attempt to] sustain herself [through her labor]. One of [her husband's] friends should provide her51 with those things she needs that she cannot purchase through the fruits of her labor, if the fruits of her labor are not sufficient for her.
כג
המדיר את אשתו מליהנות לו בין שפירש עד זמן פלוני בין שלא פירש אלא סתם ממתינין לו שלשים יום. אם תמו ימי נדרו או שלא תמו והתיר נדרו הרי זה מוטב ואם לאו יוציא ויתן כתובה. ובאותן הל' יום תהיה היא עושה ואוכלת ויהיה אחד מחביריו מפרנס אותה דברים שהיא צריכה להן יתר על מעשה ידיה אם אין מעשה ידיה מספיקין לכל:
24
When a person makes a vow [preventing] his wife from tasting one of the species of produce,52 he should be given an interval of thirty days. [If he prolongs the situation] beyond this time, he is required to divorce [his wife] and pay [her the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. [This ruling applies] even when his vow prevents her from eating undesirable food, or a species that she has never tasted in her life.
[The following rules apply when a woman] took a vow not to partake of a particular species of produce, and [her husband] allowed the vow to stand, or she took a Nazarite vow and he did not annul it.53 If he desires to remain married to her and for her not to partake of this species or to be a Nazarite, he may.54 If, however, he says: "I do not desire a woman with vows," he may divorce her, but he is required to pay her the money due her because of her ketubah. [The rationale is that] he had the option to nullify [her vow], and instead, he willingly allowed the vow to stand.
כד
המדיר את אשתו שלא תטעום אחד מכל הפירות ממתינין לו עד ל' יום יתר על כן יוציא ויתן כתובה. אפילו הדירה שלא תאכל מאכל רע אפילו הדירה ממין שלא אכלה אותו מימיה יוציא אחר ל' יום ויתן כתובה. נדרה היא שלא תאכל אחד מכל הפירות וקיים לה הוא את נדרה או נדרה בנזיר ולא הפר לה. אם רצה שתשב תחתיו ולא תאכל פירות או תהיה נזירה תשב. ואם אמר איני רוצה באשה נדרנית יוציא ויתן כתובה שהרי היה בידו להפר והוא קיים לה ברצונו:
FOOTNOTES
1.
These ten responsibilities and four privileges are all explained in detail in the chapters that follow, through Chapter 23.
2.
These requirements are mentioned in Exodus 21:10. The verse forbids a husband from denying his wife these rights. Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 262) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 46) consider this to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
3.
Note the commentary of the Ramban on Exodus (loc. cit.), which interprets sha'arah and kesutah as also referring to conjugal rights and maintains that the obligation to provide a wife with her subsistence and with garments is Rabbinic. Most authorities, however, follow the Rambam's understanding.
4.
The Ra'avad and others maintain that the husband's right to inherit his wife's property stems from the Torah itself. The matter is the subject of a difference of opinion between our Sages (Ketubot 83b), and there is no explicit resolution of the question in the Talmud. Rav Kapach maintains that the early manuscripts of the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 9:1; Bava Batra 8:1) indicate that the Rambam himself originally subscribed to the view mentioned by the Ra'avad and changed his mind later in life. (See also Halachah 9.)
5.
With regard to the other two matters that are linked the husband's obligation to redeem her and to bury her, the woman does not have this option. Although this arrangement was instituted for the woman's benefit, our Sages did not give her a choice regarding these matters, because they desired to ensure that the woman would not be forced to remain in captivity among the gentiles and that she would be buried (Shulchan Aruch and Ramah, Even HaEzer 69:5).
6.
Our Sages instituted this arrangement for the woman's benefit, since a woman's income could not ordinarily provide for her subsistence. Accordingly, the option of whether or not to forego the arrangement is in the woman's hands. If a woman can earn more than her subsistence, she is also entitled to forego the above arrangement.
Even in such a situation, the woman is still responsible for taking care of the household tasks (Maggid Mishneh).
7.
The husband may, however, tell his wife: "Endeavor to earn your subsistence, and I will compensate for whatever deficiency remains" (Ramah, Even HaEzer 69:4).
8.
I.e., although the t'na'ei ketubah are rabbinic in origin, and the obligation to provide for the woman's subsistence is from the Torah, since the linkage of it with her wages is rabbinic, the obligation is considered to be part of the t'na'ei ketubah.
9.
I.e., they are obligations that apply universally and are not dependent on the consent of a particular couple.
10.
The principle upon which this statement is based is that any stipulation to which both parties agree that concerns monetary rights - even those that are granted to a person by the Torah - is binding (Kiddushin 19b). For a person has the option to waive his right to property or privileges that justly belong to him (Rashi, loc. cit.). Therefore, a woman may waive even the rights to her subsistence or clothing that the Torah itself grants her.
11.
Instead, the failure to provide a woman with conjugal rights is considered to cause her physical anguish (Rashi, loc. cit.). Although the Mordechai maintains that conjugal rights can also be considered monetary matters, for it is possible to give a woman enough money that she would be willing to forego her rights, the Rambam's view is accepted by most authorities.
12.
I.e., the woman writes a receipt for part of the sum on her ketubah.
With regard to this instance, the Tur (Even HaEzer 66) differs and maintains that the man is not obligated to pay her the full sum.
13.
Although this is a situation that concerns financial matters, our Sages desired that the fundamental requirement of the marriage contract be a binding institution, and therefore did not allow any modification of this obligation. Hence, the stipulation is nullified.
Note the Maggid Mishneh, who mentions views that differ with that of the Rambam and maintains that if the man desires to divorce the woman, he is not obligated to give her the sum for which the Sages obligated him. It is only when he wants to remain married to her that our Sages enforced their requirement.
14.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 66:9) states that even though the man's stipulations are of no consequence, the sexual relations he conducts with his wife are considered promiscuous, because she may be unaware of the law and not know the amount due her.
15.
A different ruling applies if the stipulation is made between erusin and nisu'in, as explained in Chapter 23, Halachah 6.
16.
See Hilchot Nachalot 6:1.
17.
For a woman is obligated to eat three meals on the Sabbath as a man is (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 291:6).
Note the slight difference between the Rambam's statements here and those in Hilchot Matnot Aniyim 9:13.
18.
A me'ah is one sixth of a dinar (Kiddushin 12a). Based on the Rambam's statements in Hilchot Shekalim, ch. 1, it is evident that this is a coin of relatively small value, approximately 1.5 grams of pure silver.
19.
The Beit Shmuel 70:7 states that if he can provide her with bread, even if he cannot provide her with other food, he is not obligated to divorce her. (See, however, Chelkat Mechokek 70:12.)
The Chatam Sofer (Even HaEzer, Responsum 131) states that the Rambam's words imply that if the husband cannot support his wife from his own earnings, he is compelled to divorce her, even if she herself has the means to provide herself with subsistence.
20.
The rationale is that since he cannot provide her with subsistence, he is obligated to give her the opportunity to find another husband who can.
The Hagahot Maimoniot question whether the husband can be compelled to seek to hire himself out as a laborer, or the court's only resort is to compel him to divorce his wife. Although that text does not favor either approach, the latter opinion is quoted by the Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:3). The Ramah also mentions the opinion of Tosafot (Ketubot 63a), which states that a husband who has no resources is not compelled to divorce his wife.
21.
I.e., even in a separate dwelling (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Ketubot 5:9).
22.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam states that this prerogative may in no way infringe on the husband's obligation to provide his wife with conjugal rights. In addition, he must share the Friday night meal with her, implying that this is for the sake of communication, not only as preparation for marital relations, as understood by some commentaries.
Note the Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:2), who objects to the Rambam's ruling, and states that a man is given this prerogative only if his wife consents.
23.
Note Mishneh LaMelech and the Dagul MeRevavah (Even HaEzer 70), which state that this applies only when the woman purchased her food at a lower price than was originally estimated. If, however, she starved herself and consumed less than was allotted her, she, and not her husband, is entitled to the remainder.
24.
Food that is terumah may not be eaten if it contracts ritual impurity, nor may it be eaten by a person who is himself ritually impure.
25.
Rabbenu Nissim maintains that this obligation is incumbent on a father from the Torah itself, as an extension of his obligation to provide for his wife. Rabbenu Asher, however, maintains that the father's obligation is independent of the marriage bond. Even if he fathers children outside marriage, he is liable for their support.
26.
The obligation to provide for one's children's subsistence until majority was one of the enactments instituted by the Sanhedrin after this body was relocated in Usha in the Galilee after the destruction of Jerusalem. At that time, several enactments were passed to direct the functioning of the Jewish community in this new phase. (See Ketubot 49b.)
Today, most rabbinic authorities maintain that because of changes in the socio-economic system, it is proper for a father to continue supporting his children well past the age of Bar or Bat Mitzvah.
27.
As evident from Halachah 17, this applies only when the father is present. The Rambam maintains that a person's property may not be expropriated for this purpose outside his presence.
28.
See Hilchot Matnot Aniyim 10:16, which states:
Although he is not obligated, when a person provides subsistence for his older sons and daughters, so that the males can study the Torah and the females will follow the straight path, . . . it is an act of charity, and indeed, a great act of charity.
And Chapter 7, Halachah 10, of that source, states:
When a person does not desire to give charity, . . . the court compels him, and administers stripes for rebelliousness until he meets the assessment made for him. [Moreover,] when he is present, his property is expropriated [for this purpose].
29.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:5) quotes opinions that state that this ruling applies only when the husband left home in an atmosphere of peace. In such a situation, we can be sure that he has provided for his family. If, however, he left home annoyed with his wife, it is plausible to assume that he did not provide for her needs.
30.
I.e., after three months, or after she approaches the court. If she waits longer than three months, she is not given any payment for the previous period (Ramah, ibid.).
31.
Rabbenu Asher differs and maintains that the court should consider the amount the woman can earn when deciding on the size of her allotment. His rationale is that before expropriating a person's property, we should try to act in his interests. Although many authorities speak in favor of Rabbenu Asher's logic, they rule according to the Rambam's decision. (See Chelkat Mechokek 70:20.)
The Avnei Milu'im 70:3 explains the Rambam's position, stating that the husband is granted the right to his wife's earnings only when he provides for her subsistence willingly. When he forces her to approach the court to receive her subsistence, he has no claim on her earnings.
32.
There is a debate among the authorities whether or not she must consult experts with regard to the evaluation of the object. (See Chelkat Mechokek 70:21.)
33.
Generally, when property is sold by the court, it is necessary that a public announcement be made informing people of the sale, to attract customers and assure competitive bidding. (See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 22:6.) In this instance, no such requirement is made, in order that the woman will not have to wait to receive the funds she requires.
34.
See Chapter 16, Halachah 4.
35.
Whenever a person is required to take an oath, the plaintiff can obligate him to take an oath on another claim. In this instance, since the woman is obligated to take an oath to her husband's heirs to collect the money due her for her ketubah, she can be required to take an additional oath regarding the sale of his property for her subsistence.
36.
We do not expropriate his property and provide for his children as an act of charity, because it is possible that he is giving charity in the place to which he has journeyed.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 71:2) states that if the person had supported his older children before leaving on his journey, provisions should be made for his children while he is away. It can be assumed that this would be his desire. The Ramah also mentions the opinion of Rabbenu Nissim, which states that if he possesses means, support should be provided for his children from his property as an act of charity. This view is not, however, accepted by most later authorities.
37.
The Maggid Mishneh states that the Rambam's wording appears to imply that no provision is made for his older children, even when he has the means to support them. The Maggid Mishneh, however, refers to Hilchot Nachalot 11:11, which states that when a person who has means loses control of his faculties, the court levels an assessment for charity on his estate. Accordingly, it would appear that if the man has the means to give charity, his property is expropriated to pay for his children's subsistence, even if they are over six.
The Tur (Even HaEzer 71) states that in such an instance, the court should expropriate funds for the subsistence of the person's older children even if the person's estate is not large enough for an assessment for charity to be leveled against it. The rationale is that we assume that, like the majority of people, this person would also desire to support his children. The Chelkat Mechokek 71:6 maintains that the Shulchan Aruch follows this view, and not that of the Rambam.
38.
See Chapter 17, Halachah 19.
39.
Rabbenu Asher and others do not accept the Rambam's distinction, and maintain that the court should also protect the interests of a person who is in another country and cannot defend himself. Nevertheless, in his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Karo defends the Rambam's decision, explaining that in contrast to an heir, the husband has the potential to take his claim to court when he returns. In his Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 70:5), he quotes the Rambam's ruling. This ruling is also accepted by the later authorities.
40.
See Halachah 2.
41.
Since the heir himself was not aware of the details of his benefactor's affairs, he cannot necessarily advance claims in his own interests. Therefore, the court acts to protect them. (See Bava Batra 23a.)
42.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 70:8) states that the benefactor must lodge a claim against the wife, who in turn must lodge a claim against her husband.
43.
Although the husband is obligated to pay for his wife's subsistence, our Sages rule that when a person pays a debt on behalf of a colleague without being instructed to do so, the debtor is not at all obligated to his patron.
44.
Although our Sages associated a woman's earnings with her subsistence, they made this association for the woman's sake and gave her the prerogative of accepting or declining such a request. In a responsum, the Rambam writes that if it is not logical to assume that she could earn the funds required for her subsistence, for her to forfeit her rights, she must explicitly consent to her husband's stipulation.
45.
I.e., a less severe oath instituted by the Rabbis. (See Hilchot To'en V'Nit'an 1:3.)
46.
She, however, does not have the opportunity of paying the debt until she is divorced or becomes widowed, because all her property is under lien to her husband, and he is entitled to her earnings.
47.
Since it was movable property and not landed property that was sold, the oath that the woman is required to take is more lenient than that mentioned in the previous halachah. The rationale is that had she desired to lie, she could have claimed that the goods were stolen or lost.
48.
I.e., she cannot demand reimbursement for the difference between her earnings and the amount she would ordinarily be entitled to for her subsistence (Chelkat Mechokek 70:41). If she earned more than her subsistence, the additional funds belong to her, not to her husband (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 70:11).
49.
Based on Ketubot 59b, Rabbenu Asher and Rabbenu Nissim object to the Rambam's ruling. Since the husband is liable to provide for his wife's subsistence, the vow he takes cannot override that obligation, except in specific instances. In both the Kessef Mishneh, and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 235:2), Rav Yosef Karo follows these views.
50.
After thirty days, the matter will become public knowledge and the woman will suffer ridicule. Therefore, her husband is obligated to divorce (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Ketubot 7:1).
51.
The Mishnah (Ketubot, op. cit.) states that her husband should appoint a person to provide for her. As the Talmud explains (Ketubot 71a), this does not mean that he should appoint this person as an agent, for this is forbidden by his vow. Instead, he should say, "Whoever provides for my wife will not suffer a loss."
52.
As the Maggid Mishneh explains, this refers to a situation in which the husband took a vow that if his wife partakes of a particular species of produce, she will be forbidden to benefit from his property (or according to the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 235:3, that sexual relations between them will be forbidden). If, however, the husband takes a vow that his wife may not eat a particular type of produce, that vow is nullified. For a person cannot take a vow to restrict the actions of another person.
53.
For, as Numbers 30:8-9 relates, a husband has the right to nullify or uphold the vows his wife takes.
54.
As Rav Yosef Karo mentions in both the Kessef Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), other opinions require the husband to divorce his wife in such a situation.
Ishut - Chapter Thirteen
1
To what extent is he required to provide her with garments? Annually, he must purchase for her clothes that were worth 50 zuz in the coinage prevalent [in the Talmudic period], these being worth six and one fourth dinarim of pure silver.1
He should provide her with new [garments] during the rainy season. After these garments become worn, she should wear them in the summer. Frayed garments - that which remains from her garments from the previous year - belong to her; she should wear them while she is in the niddah state.
She is granted a belt for her loins, a cap for her head and new shoes on each festival.
א
כמה הכסות שהוא חייב ליתן לה. בגדים של ג' זוז משנה לשנה ממטבע אותן הימים שנמצאו הג' ששה דינרין ורביע דינר כסף. נותנין לה חדשים בימות הגשמים ולובשת בלאותיהן בימות החמה. והשחקים והם מותר הכסות הרי הן שלה כדי שתתכסה בהם בימי נדתה. ונותנין לה חגורה למתניה וכפה לראשה ומנעל ממועד למועד:
2
When does the above apply? In [the Talmudic period,] and in Eretz Yisrael, but in other ages or in other countries, there is no fixed amount of money [determined for this purpose]. For there are some places where garments are very expensive, and others where they are inexpensive.
The fundamental principle is2 that he is obligated to provide her with appropriate clothes for the winter and the summer, the minimal that are worn by a married woman in that country.
ב
בד"א באותן הימים ובארץ ישראל אבל בשאר זמנים ושאר המקומות אין הדמים עיקר. יש מקומות שיהיו שם הבגדים ביוקר הרבה או בזול הרבה. אלא העיקר שסומכין עליו שמחייבין אותו ליתן לה בגדים הראויים בימות הגשמים ובימות החמה בפחות שלובשת כל אשה בעלת בית שבאותה המדינה:
3
Included in the [obligation to provide her with] garments is the requirement to provide her with household goods and a dwelling place.3
With which household goods is he obligated to provide her? With a bed and its spreads, a reed or woven rug to sit on, and utensils with which to eat and drink - e.g., a pot, a plate, a cup, a bottle and the like.
With regard to her dwelling? He must rent a dwelling at least four cubits by four cubits. It must have a yard outside for her use and a latrine [nearby].
ג
ובכלל הכסות שהוא חייב ליתן לה כלי בית ומדור שיושבת בו. ומה הן כלי בית מטה מוצעת ומפץ או מחצלת לישב עליה. וכלי אכילה ושתיה כגון קדרה וקערה וכוס ובקבוק וכיוצא בהן. והמדור ששוכר לה בית של ד' אמות על ד' אמות ותהיה רחבה חוצה לה כדי להשתמש בה. ויהיה לו בית הכסא חוץ ממנו:
4
Similarly, he is obligated to provide her with ornaments - e.g., colored cloths to wrap her head and forehead, eye-makeup, rouge and the like - so that she will not appear unattractive to him.
ד
וכן מחייבין אותו ליתן לה תכשיטים כגון בגדי צבעונין להקיף על ראשה ופדחתה ופוך ושרק וכיוצא בה כדי שלא תתגנה עליו:
5
When does the above apply? With regard to a poor Jewish man. Concerning a rich man, by contrast, all [of his obligations are judged] according to the extent of his wealth.4 If it would be appropriate for him to buy her silk and embroidered clothing and golden articles, he is compelled to provide her with these.
Similarly, the dwelling [he is required to give her] is judged according to his wealth, as are the ornaments and the household goods. If he does not have the means to provide her with the minimum required of a poor Jewish man, he is compelled to divorce her.5 The money due her by virtue of her ketubah is considered to be a debt that he is required to pay when he gains the means.
ה
בד"א בעני שבישראל אבל בעשיר הכל לפי עשרו. ואפילו היה ראוי לקנות לה כלי משי ורקמה וכלי זהב כופין אותו ונותן. וכן המדור לפי עשרו והתכשיט וכלי הבית הכל לפי עשרו. ואם קצרה ידו ליתן לה אפילו כעני שבישראל כופין אותו להוציא ותהיה הכתובה עליו חוב עד שיעשיר:
6
[A man] is obligated to provide the necessary clothing, dwelling and household goods, not only for his wife, but also for his sons and daughters who are six years old or less.6 He is not, however, required to provide for them according to his wealth; all that is necessary is that he provide for their needs.
This is the governing principle: whenever a husband [or his estate] is required to provide for a person's subsistence - whether the husband is alive or deceased - the husband [or his estate] is also obligated to provide for the person's clothing, household goods and dwelling. Whenever a court must sell [a person's property] to provide for [a dependent's] subsistence,7 they also sell [his property] to provide [the dependent] with clothing, household goods and a dwelling.
ו
ולא האשה בלבד אלא בניו ובנותיו הקטנים בני שש או פחות חייב ליתן להם כסות המספקת להם וכלי תשמיש ומדור לשכון בו. ואינו נותן להם לפי עשרו אלא כפי צרכן בלבד. זה הכלל כל מי שיש לו עליו מזונות בין בחייו בין אחר מותו יש לו כסות וכלי בית ומדור. וכל שב"ד מוכרין למזונותיו כך מוכרין לכסותו וכלי ביתו ומדורו:
7
When a woman's husband has departed on a journey, and the court allots [money from his property] for her subsistence, her clothes, her household goods and the renting of a dwelling, they do not allot her money for ornaments. For she does not have a husband [present] for whom to make herself attractive. If, by contrast, a woman's husband loses his mental faculties or becomes a deaf mute, she is granted an allotment for ornaments.8
The laws that apply to the claims and counterclaims between a woman and her husband with regard to garments, clothing and the rental of a dwelling [in the event of the husband's departure on an extended journey] are the same as those that apply with regard to her subsistence. If he claims to have provided for her and she denies [his claim], the same rulings apply to all claims.
ז
האשה שהלך בעלה ופסקו לה ב"ד מזונות וכסות וכלי בית ושכר מדור אין פוסקין לה תכשיט שהרי אין לה בעל שתתקשט לו. אבל מי שנשתטה בעלה או שנתחרש פוסקין לה תכשיט. ודין הבעל עם אשתו בטענת הכסות והכלים ושכר המדור כדינם בטענת המזונות אם אמר הוא נתתי והיא אומרת לא נתת דין אחד לכל:
8
[The following rules apply if a husband] takes a vow that prevents9 his wife from wearing any type of ornament. If the couple are poor, they may remain married for a year while the vow is in effect.10 If [it remains in effect] for a longer period, he must either absolve himself of the vow, or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
If the couple are wealthy, they may remain married for a month while the vow is in effect. If [it remains in effect] for a longer period, he must either absolve himself of the vow or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
ח
המדיר את אשתו שלא תתקשט באחד מכל המינין. בעניות שנה אחת יקיים יתר על כן או יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה. ובעשירות ל' יום יקיים יתר על כן יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה:
9
[The following rules apply if a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from going to the bathhouse. [The couple may remain married for only] one week in a large city and two weeks in a village [if the vow remains in effect]. If he takes a vow that prevents his wife from wearing shoes [the couple may remain married for only] three days11 in a village and one day in a large city.12 If [the vow remains in effect] for a longer period, he must either absolve himself of the vow or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
ט
הדירה שלא תלך למרחץ. בכרכים שבת אחת בכפרים שתי שבתות. שלא תנעול מנעל. בכפרים ג' ימים ובכרכים מעת לעת. יתר על זה יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה:
10
If [a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from borrowing or lending household goods that are frequently lent and borrowed between neighbors - e.g., a sifter, a sieve, a mill, an oven or the like - he must either absolve himself of the vow, or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.13 [The rationale is that his vow] causes her to have a bad reputation among her neighbors.
Similarly, if she takes an oath14 not to borrow or lend [neighbors] a sifter, a sieve, a mill, an oven or the like, or not to weave attractive garments for her sons in places where it is customary to do so, he may divorce her without paying her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. [The rationale is that her vow] causes him to have a reputation as a miser among his neighbors.
י
הדירה שלא תשאל ולא תשאיל מכלי הבית שדרך כל השכנות לשאול אותן ולהשאילן כגון נפה וכברה רחים ותנור וכיוצא בהם. יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה מפני שמשיאה שם רע בשכונתיה. וכן היא שנדרה שלא תשאל ולא תשאיל נפה וכברה ורחים ותנור וכיוצא בהם ושלא תארוג בגדים נאים לבנים במקום שדרכן לארוג אותם לבנים תצא בלא כתובה מפני שמשיאתו שם רע בשכונתו שהוא כילי:
11
In a place where it is customary for a woman not to go out to the market place wearing merely a cap on her head, but also a veil that covers her entire body like a cloak, her husband must provide at least the least expensive type of veil for her. If he is wealthy, [he must provide her with a veil whose quality] is commensurate with his wealth.
[He must give her this veil] so that she can visit her father's home, a house of mourning or a wedding celebration. For every woman should be given the opportunity to visit her father and to go to a house of mourning or a wedding celebration as an expression of kindness to her friends and relatives, for [this will have a reciprocal effect], and they will return the visits. For a woman [at home] is not confined in a jail, from which she cannot come and go.
Nevertheless, it is uncouth for a woman always to leave home - this time to go out and another time to go on the street. Indeed, a husband should prevent a wife from doing this and not allow her to go out more than once or twice a month, as is necessary.15 For there is nothing more attractive for a woman than to sit in the corner of her home, as [implied by Psalms 45:14]: "All the glory of the king's daughter is within."
יא
מקום שדרכן שלא תצא אשה לשוק בכפה שעל ראשה בלבד עד שיהיה עליה רדיד החופה את כל גופה כמו טלית נותן לה בכלל הכסות רדיד הפחות מכל הרדידין. ואם היה עשיר נותן לה לפי עשרו כדי שתצא בו לבית אביה או לבית האבל או לבית המשתה. לפי שכל אשה יש לה לצאת ולילך לבית אביה לבקרו ולבית האבל ולבית המשתה לגמול חסד לרעותיה או לקרובותיה כדי שיבואו הם לה. שאינה בבית הסוהר עד שלא תצא ולא תבוא. אבל גנאי הוא לאשה שתהיה יוצאה תמיד פעם בחוץ פעם ברחובות. ויש לבעל למנוע אשתו מזה ולא יניחנה לצאת אלא פעם אחת בחודש או כמה פעמים בחודש לפי הצורך. שאין יופי לאשה אלא לישב בזוית ביתה שכך כתוב כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה:
12
[The following rules apply when a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from going to her father's home. If he lives in the same city, [the husband] is granted a respite of one month. [If he desires to maintain his vow at the beginning of] the second month, he must divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. If [the wife's father lives] in another city, [the husband] is granted respite until the first festival.16[If he desires to maintain his vow until] the second [festival], he must divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.
יב
המדיר את אשתו שלא תלך לבית אביה בזמן שהוא עמה בעיר חודש אחד ממתינין לו שנים יוציא ויתן כתובה. ובזמן שהוא בעיר אחרת רגל אחד ממתינין לו שנים יוציא ויתן כתובה:
13
[The following rules apply when a husband] takes a vow that prevents his wife from going to a house of mourning or to wedding celebrations. He must either absolve himself of the vow or divorce [his wife] and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. For this is like placing her in jail and locking her in.
If [the husband] claims: "[I forbade her from going] because of indecent people who were present at that house of mourning or wedding," and it was discovered that indeed, indecent people were present, he is given the prerogative [of making that vow].
יג
המדיר את אשתו שלא תלך לבית האבל או לבית המשתה. או יתיר את נדרו או יוציא ויתן כתובה שזה כמי שאסרה בבית הסוהר ונעל בפניה. ואם היה טוען מפני בני אדם פרוצים שיש באותו בית האבל או בבית המשתה והוחזקו שם פרוצים שומעין לו:
14
When a person tells his wife, "I do not desire that your father, your mother, your brothers and your sisters come into my domain," he is given that prerogative. Instead, she should visit them when an [unusual] event occurs to them. And she should visit her father's house once a month and on each festival. They, by contrast, should visit her only when an unusual event of great import occurs - e.g., sickness or birth. For a person should not be forced to have others enter his domain.
Similarly, if [the wife] says: "I do not want your mother and your sisters to visit, nor will I live together with them in one courtyard, because they cause me difficulties and distress," she is given that prerogative.17 For a person should not be forced to have others dwell with him in his domain.
יד
האומר לאשתו אין רצוני שיבואו לביתי אביך ואמך אחיך ואחיותיך שומעין לו ותהיה היא הולכת להם כשיארע להם דבר. ותלך לבית אביה פעם בחודש ובכל רגל ורגל. ולא יכנסו הם לה אלא אם אירע לה דבר כגון חולי או לידה. שאין כופין את האדם שיכנסו אחרים ברשותו. וכן היא שאמרה אין רצוני שיכנסו אצלי אמך ואחיותיך ואיני שוכנת עמהם בחצר אחת מפני שמריעין לי ומצירין לי שומעין לה. שאין כופין את האדם שישבו אחרים עמו ברשותו:
15
When a husband says: "I will not dwell in this home, because there are wicked or indecent people or gentiles in this neighborhood, and I fear them," he is given that prerogative. This applies even if it has not been established that there are indecent people living there. For our Sages ordained:18 "Keep away from a bad neighbor." Even if the dwelling belongs to the woman, she is forced to leave it, and they should establish their dwelling among worthy people.19
The same law applies if the woman makes such a demand. Although [the husband] says, "I do not object to them," her will is followed. [The rationale is that] she can say, "I do not want to get a bad reputation in these neighborhoods."
טו
האיש שאמר איני דר במדור זה מפני שבני אדם רעים או פרוצים או עכו"ם בשכונתי ואני מתירא מהם שומעים לו. ואע"פ שלא הוחזקו בפריצות שכך צוו חכמים הרחק משכן רע. ואפילו היה המדור שלה מוציאין אותה ממנו ושוכן בין בני אדם כשרים. וכך היא שאמרה כן אעפ"י שהוא אומר אני איני מקפיד עליהם שומעין לה מפני שהיא אומרת אין רצוני שיצא עלי שום רע בשכנות אלו:
16
All of the earth is divided into different lands - e.g., the Land of Canaan, the Land of Egypt, the Land of Yemen, the Land of Ethiopia, the Land of Babylonia and the like.20 Every land is subdivided into large cities21 and villages. With regard to the subject of marriage, the cities of Eretz Yisrael are considered to be divided into three different lands: Judea, Transjordan and the Galilee.
טז
כל הישוב ארצות ארצות הוא. כגון ארץ כנען וארץ מצרים וארץ תימן וארץ כוש וארץ שנער וכיוצא בהן. וכל ארץ וארץ ממדינות וכפרים. וערי ישראל לענין נישואין ג' ארצות היו יהודה ועבר הירדן והגליל:
17
When a man from one of these lands marries a woman in another land, she is compelled to follow him to his land, or to accept a divorce without receiving [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. [The rationale is that,] although it was not specifically stated, [it can be assumed] that he married her on this condition.22
When, however, a person marries a woman in a particular land and he23 is from that land, he does not have the right to [compel] her to move to another land. He may, nevertheless, [compel] her to move from city to city and from village to village within that land.
He may not, however, [compel] her to move from a city to a village, or from a village to a city. For there are certain advantages to living in a city, and other advantages to living in a village.
יז
איש שהיה מארץ מן הארצות ונשא אשה בארץ אחרת כופין אותה ויוצאה עמו לארצו או תצא בלא כתובה שע"מ כן נשאה אף ע"פ שלא פירש. אבל הנושא אשה באחת מן הארצות והיא מאנשי אותה הארץ אינו יכול להוציאה לארץ אחרת. אבל מוציאה ממדינה למדינה ומכפר לכפר באותה הארץ ואינו יכול להוציאה ממדינה לכפר ולא מכפר למדינה שיש דברים שישיבת המדינה טובה להם ויש דברים שישיבת הכפרים טובה להם:
18
When he [compels] her to move from one city to another, or from one village to another within a particular land, he may not compel her to move from pleasant surroundings24 to unpleasant surroundings, nor from unpleasant [surroundings] to pleasant ones. [Although the latter move would seemingly be to her benefit, she still must consent,] because she must care for and check herself in the pleasant surroundings, so that she will not be considered inferior and unattractive.25
Similarly, [her husband] may not [compel] her to move from an area inhabited primarily by Jews to an area inhabited primarily by gentiles. Wherever [the couple lives], they should move26 from an area inhabited primarily by gentiles to an area inhabited primarily by Jews.
יח
וכשמוציאה ממדינה למדינה ומכפר לכפר באותה הארץ אינו יכול להוציאה מנוה היפה לנוה הרע ולא מרע ליפה. מפני שהיא צריכה להטפל ולבדוק עצמה בנוה היפה כדי שלא תהיה בו קלה וכעורה. וכן לא יוציאה ממקום שרובו ישראל למקום שרובו עכו"ם. ובכל מקום מוציאין ממקום שרובו עכו"ם למקום שרובו ישראל:
19
When does the above apply? When moving from one place in the diaspora to another, or from one place in Eretz Yisrael to another. But if [the husband desires to move] from the diaspora to Eretz Yisrael, the woman should be compelled to move.27 [This applies even when moving involves leaving] pleasant surroundings for unpleasant ones. Even [when it is necessary to leave] an area inhabited primarily by Jews for an area inhabited primarily by gentiles, one should [move to Eretz Yisrael].
One should not leave Eretz Yisrael for the diaspora,28 even if the move enables one to relocate from unpleasant [surroundings] to pleasant ones, and even when it enables one to move from an area inhabited primarily by gentiles to an area inhabited primarily by Jews.
יט
בד"א מחוצה לארץ לח"ל או מארץ ישראל לארץ ישראל אבל מחוצה לארץ לארץ ישראל כופין אותה לעלות אפילו מנוה היפה לנוה הרע ואפילו ממקום שרובו ישראל למקום שרובו עכו"ם מעלין. ואין מוציאין מארץ ישראל לחוצה לארץ ואפילו מנוה הרע לנוה היפה [ואפילו ממקום] שרובו עכו"ם למקום שרובו ישראל:
20
When a husband desires to move to Eretz Yisrael and [his wife] does not desire to do so, he may divorce her without paying her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah. If she desires to move [to Eretz Yisrael] and he does not desire to do so, he must divorce her and pay her [the money due her by virtue of her] ketubah.29
The same laws apply with regard to moving from other places in Eretz Yisrael to Jerusalem. [Just as] everyone should move to Eretz Yisrael, and no one should leave there, [so too,] everyone should move to Jerusalem, and no one should leave there.30
כ
אמר האיש לעלות לארץ ישראל והיא אינה רוצה תצא בלא כתובה. אמרה היא לעלות והוא אינו רוצה יוציא ויתן כתובה. והוא הדין לכל מקום מארץ ישראל עם ירושלים. שהכל מעלין לארץ ישראל ואין הכל מוציאין משם. הכל מעלין לירושלים ואין הכל מוציאין משם:
FOOTNOTES
1.
For a zuz was only one eighth pure silver.
2.
See Halachah 5.
3.
I.e., the obligation to provide one's wife with household goods and a dwelling stems from the Torah itself and is not merely a Rabbinic ordinance.
4.
I.e., a man is obligated to provide his wife with the clothes appropriate for a woman of her social standing (or his social standing, if he is of higher social standing than she) in the country in which they dwell.
5.
For she should be given the opportunity to marry a man who can provide her with her basic necessities. (See Chapter 12, Halachah 11 and notes.)
6.
Similarly, if he is capable of giving charity, he should provide for his sons and daughters above the age of six, as explained in Chapter 12, Halachah 15 (Chelkat Mechokek 73:5).
7.
See Chapter 12, Halachah 16.
8.
Rashi, Ketubot 48a, explains the difference between the two instances. When the husband left on the journey, he decided to leave his wife without adornments. Hence, we may not expropriate the money for them from his property. When, by contrast, a man loses his mental faculties, the court attempts to support the man's wife as her husband would have liked to. And we assume that he would have preferred that his wife have ornaments to adorn herself.
9.
See the notes on Chapter 12, Halachah 24.
10.
A poor woman does not wear ornaments very frequently and will not feel deprived if she does not adorn herself for a year. A rich woman, by contrast, cannot bear not to wear ornaments for such an extended period.
11.
This law is based on the Jerusalem Talmud (Ketubot 7:4). The standard printed text of that source, however, has a slightly different version, stating "three months" instead of three days.
12.
These rulings were dependent on the socio-economic conditions prevalent in the Talmudic period. If the norms are different in other societies, the rulings also change.
13.
The Maggid Mishneh states that the husband is given thirty days to consider absolving his vow. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 74:3) states he must divorce her immediately. If the husband makes the vow dependent on marital relations, he is given a week to consider the matter (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit. 74:3).
14.
Note the slight deviation between the wording chosen by the Rambam and that employed by the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.).
15.
While the spirit of the Rambam's words is appreciated, in most communities the norm is for women to leave their homes far more frequently.
16.
For it is customary for a daughter to visit her parents during the festivals.
17.
Based on the views of the Ra'avad and others, the Ramah (Even HaEzer 74:10) explains that the woman's rights are different from her husband's. Since the dwelling belongs to him, he may invite his mother and sisters. Nevertheless, efforts should be made to mediate between them and his wife. If necessary, a man or a woman should be placed in the home to see who is the cause of the difficulty.
18.
Avot 1:7.
19.
See Hilchot De'ot 6:1, where the Rambam emphasizes the importance of eschewing an undesirable environment and dwelling in a favorable one.
20.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 75:1) states that it is a difference in language that divides one land from another. The Rivash (Responsum 177) states that the determining factor is the government of the land. This matter is discussed by the later authorities, particularly in light of the emergence of large countries comprising many times the area of Eretz Yisrael in the Talmudic period. Many commentaries define a land as a place inhabited by people who speak the same language and are governed by the same authority. Even that is common today.
21.
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 13:10). The contemporary translation of מדינה as "state" or "country" is not appropriate in this context.
22.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 75:1) quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Tam (Ketubot 110b), which states that when the two come from different lands and the marriage is held in one of these lands, the place where the couple marries determines their future dwelling. If, however, they each come from a different land from that in which the marriage is held, the woman may compel her husband to live in her native land. See also the opinion of Terumat HaDeshen (Responsum 416, quoted by the Ramah, loc. cit.), which states that if the man cannot earn a livelihood in the locale in which he is living, he may compel his wife to follow him to any place where he can.
23.
Our text follows the version found in many manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah and that which is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 75:1). The standard published version states "she" instead of "he."
24.
I.e., the neighborhood and its scenery. Our translation is based on the Ma'aseh Rokeach. Others translate נוה as "dwelling" - i.e., the home in which the couple reside.
25.
The Rambam appears to be saying that the woman must dress and present herself in an appropriate way in an attractive setting, and she might not desire to make such an effort. Rashi (Ketubot 110b) explains that the change in lifestyle may cause illness.
26.
Our translation is based on the Bayit Chadash (Even HaEzer 75), which states that the woman may compel her husband to make such a move. Note, however, the Chelkat Mechokek 75:12, which states that this interpretation need not be accepted.
27.
As reflected in Hilchot Melachim, Chapter 5, the Rambam does not consider living in Eretz Yisrael a mitzvah [in contrast to the view of the Ramban (Hosafot l'Sefer HaMitzvot, Positive Mitzvah 4) and others, who do]. Nevertheless, he states (Hilchot Melachim 5:12): "At all times... a person should dwell in Eretz Yisrael... rather than in the diaspora."
The commentaries interpret the expression "At all times" to include even the present age. Tosafot, Ketubot 110b, explains that because we are unsure how to fulfill the agricultural laws of Eretz Yisrael, there is no obligation to live there in the present age. Others explain that because of the dangers that exist in Eretz Yisrael, there is no obligation. (See Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 75:5.) As reflected in this ruling and in one of his responsa, the Rambam negates those views and advocates living in Eretz Yisrael, even in the present age.
28.
See Hilchot Melachim 5:9, which states that it is forbidden to leave Eretz Yisrael for the purpose of settling in the diaspora, unless there is a famine of extreme severity. Even then, abandoning the land is not considered desirable. In Hilchot Melachim 5:12, he states: "Whoever leaves [Eretz Yisrael] for the diaspora is considered as though he worships idols."
29.
As mentioned above, there are opinions that maintain that in the present age, there is no obligation to dwell in Eretz Yisrael. According to these views, this ruling does not apply. Although the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 75:4-5) also mentions the opposing view, it appears to follow the opinion stated by the Rambam. Nevertheless, many Ashkenazic authorities maintain (see Ba'er Heteiv 75:19) that at present one may not divorce a woman without paying her the money due her for her ketubah because she does not desire to move to Eretz Yisrael. Although the Pitchei Teshuvah 75:7 speaks extensively about the positive value of living in Eretz Yisrael in the present age, it mentions another factor - the difficulty of earning a living in Eretz Yisrael - and states that unless one is assured of being able to sustain himself through work - as opposed to receiving charity - one may not compel one's family to relocate.
30.
There are opinions (Mordechai, at the conclusion of Ketubot) that maintain that in the present age, when there is no Temple, there is no difference between Jerusalem and other cities in Eretz Yisrael. Nevertheless, the fact that this law is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 75:4), a text that deals only with laws applicable at present, appears to imply that the Rambam's ruling should be applied in the present age as well.
• Tuesday, 5 Tevet, 5777 · 3 January 2017
• "Today's Day"
• Sunday, Tevet 5*, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayigash, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 29-34.
Tanya: Ch. 6. "The A-lmighty (p. 21)..."ruination of the spirit..." (p. 23).
When Mashiach comes we will realize the greatness of hoda'a (acknowledgement, or belief) and t'mimut (earnestness), everyone's pure faith in G-d and His Torah and mitzvot. Talmud - namely, human comprehension, even on its highest level - is limited. But hoda'a, faith, is a feeling that is boundless. Mashiach will explain the magnificent achievement of t'mimut - earnest avoda flowing from the heart.
FOOTNOTES
*.This day is the chassidic festival of didan natzach ("our side is victorious," viz. Vayikra Raba 24:3) marking the issuance, in 5747 (1987), of a US Federal Court ruling which placed the legal imprimatur of the USA upon the total exclusive ownership by Agudas Chassidei Chabad of the great library and collection of s'farim (Torah-books) and k'tavim (manuscripts) of the Chabad Rebbe'im. "The day on which 'our side was victorious' (didan natzach) openly, in sight of all the nations (in Federal Court) with regard to the s'farim and k'tavim of our Rebbe'im - leaders, in the library of Lubavitch." (Note by the Rebbe of righteous memory to sicha of Tuesday, Tevet 5, 5747).
• Daily Thought:
From Beyond, With Love
A miracle is what occurs when a force from beyond our tightly defined little world enters within.
That is why to see a miracle, you need an open heart and mind.
Open enough to receive the Infinite.
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment