Today in Jewish History:
• Passing of Rabbi Chaim Mordechai Maroglis (c.1823) Rabbi Chaim Mordechai Maroglis first served as rabbi in Brestitzki, Poland, and later in Dubno, Poland/Ukraine. He is the author of a digest of halachic responsa written after the publication of the Code of Jewish Law, known as “Shaarei Teshuvah.” This work can be found in the margins of most prints of the Code of Jewish Law.
Daily Quote:
For two-and-a--half years, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel debated. These said: It is better for man not to have been created than to have been created; and those said: It is better for man to have been created than to not have been created. In the end, they voted on it and concluded: It is better for man not to have been created than to have been created; but now that he was created, he should search his deeds.[Talmud, Eruvin 13b]Today's Study:
• Passing of Rabbi Chaim Mordechai Maroglis (c.1823) Rabbi Chaim Mordechai Maroglis first served as rabbi in Brestitzki, Poland, and later in Dubno, Poland/Ukraine. He is the author of a digest of halachic responsa written after the publication of the Code of Jewish Law, known as “Shaarei Teshuvah.” This work can be found in the margins of most prints of the Code of Jewish Law.
Daily Quote:
For two-and-a--half years, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel debated. These said: It is better for man not to have been created than to have been created; and those said: It is better for man to have been created than to not have been created. In the end, they voted on it and concluded: It is better for man not to have been created than to have been created; but now that he was created, he should search his deeds.[Talmud, Eruvin 13b]Today's Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:Chumash: Yitro, 1st Portion Exodus 18:1-18:12 with Rashi
• Exodus Chapter 18
1Now Moses' father in law, Jethro, the chieftain of Midian, heard all that God had done for Moses and for Israel, His people that the Lord had taken Israel out of Egypt. אוַיִּשְׁמַ֞ע יִתְר֨וֹ כֹהֵ֤ן מִדְיָן֙ חֹתֵ֣ן משֶׁ֔ה אֵת֩ כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשָׂ֤ה אֱלֹהִים֙ לְמשֶׁ֔ה וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל עַמּ֑וֹ כִּֽי־הוֹצִ֧יא יְהוָֹ֛ה אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מִמִּצְרָֽיִם:
Now…Jethro…heard: What news did he hear that [made such an impression that] he came? The splitting of the Red Sea and the war with Amalek. — [from Zev. 116a, and Mechilta, combining the views of Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Eliezer] וישמע יתרו: מה שמועה שמע ובא, קריעת ים סוף ומלחמת עמלק:
Jethro: He was called by seven names: Reuel, Jether, Jethro [i.e., Yithro], Hobab, Heber, Keni, [and] Putiel (Mechilta). [He was called] Jether (יֶתֶר) because he [caused] a section to be added (יִתֵּר) to the Torah [namely]: “But you shall choose” (below verse 21). [He was called] Jethro (יִתְרוֹ) [to indicate that] when he converted and fulfilled the commandments, a letter was added to his name. [He was called] Hobab (חוֹבָב) [which means lover] because he loved (חִבָּב) the Torah. Hobab was indeed Jethro, as it is said: “of the children of Hobab, Moses’ father-in-law” (Jud. 4:11). Others say that Reuel was Jethro’s father. [If so,] what [is the meaning of] what it [Scripture] says [referring to the daughters of Jethro]: “They came to their father Reuel” (Exod. 2:18)? Because [young] children call their grandfather “Father.” [This appears] in Sifrei (Beha’alothecha 10:29). יתרו: שבע שמות נקראו לו רעואל, יתר, יתרו, חובב, חבר, קיני, פוטיאל. יתר, על שם שיתר פרשה אחת בתורה (להלן פסוק כא) ואתה תחזה. יתרו לכשנתגייר וקיים המצות הוסיפו לו אות אחת על שמו. חובב שחבב את התורה. וחובב הוא יתרו, שנאמר (שופטים ד יא) מבני חובב חותן משה. ויש אומרים רעואל אביו של יתרו היה, ומה הוא אומר (שמות ב יח) ותבאנה אל רעואל אביהן, שהתינוקות קורין לאבי אביהן אבא. בספרי:
Moses’ father-in-law: Here Jethro prides himself on [his relationship to] Moses, [saying,] “I am the king’s father-in-law.” In the past, Moses attributed the greatness to his father-in-law, as it is said: “Moses went and returned to Jether, his father-in-law” (Exod. 4:18). [from Mechilta] חתן משה: כאן היה יתרו מתכבד במשה, אני חותן המלך ולשעבר היה משה תולה הגדולה בחמיו, שנאמר (שמות ד יח) וישב אל יתר חותנו:
for Moses and for Israel: Moses was equal to all of Israel. [Mechilta] למשה ולישראל: שקול משה כנגד כל ישראל:
all that…had done: for them with the descent of the manna, with the well, and with Amalek. את כל אשר עשה: להם בירידת המן ובבאר ובעמלק:
that the Lord had taken Israel out…: This was the greatest of them all. — [from Mechilta] כי הוציא ה' וגו': זו גדולה על כולם:
2So Moses' father in law, Jethro, took Zipporah, Moses' wife, after she had been sent away, בוַיִּקַּ֗ח יִתְרוֹ֙ חֹתֵ֣ן משֶׁ֔ה אֶת־צִפֹּרָ֖ה אֵ֣שֶׁת משֶׁ֑ה אַחַ֖ר שִׁלּוּחֶֽיהָ:
after she had been sent away: When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him in Midian, “Go, return to Egypt” (Exod. 4: 19), “and Moses took his wife and his sons, etc.” (Exod. 4:20), and Aaron went forth “and met him on the mount of God” (Exod. 4:27), he [Aaron] said to him [Moses], “Who are these?” He [Moses] replied, “This is my wife, whom I married in Midian, and these are my sons.” "And where are you taking them?" he [Aaron] asked. “To Egypt,” he replied. He [Aaron] retorted, “We are suffering with the first ones, and you come to add to them?” He [Moses] said to her [Zipporah], “Go home to your father.” She took her two sons and went away. — [from Mechilta] אחר שלוחיה: כשאמר לו הקב"ה במדין (שמות ד יט) לך שוב מצרימה, (שם כ) ויקח משה את אשתו ואת בניו גו' ויצא אהרן לקראתו, (שם כז) ויפגשהו בהר הא-להים. אמר לו מי הם הללו. אמר לו זו היא אשתי שנשאתי במדין ואלו בני. אמר לו והיכן אתה מוליכן. אמר לו למצרים. אמר לו על הראשונים אנו מצטערים ואתה בא להוסיף עליהם. אמר לה לכי אל בית אביך, נטלה שני בניה והלכה לה:
3and her two sons, one of whom was named Gershom, because he [Moses] said, "I was a stranger in a foreign land," גוְאֵ֖ת שְׁנֵ֣י בָנֶ֑יהָ אֲשֶׁ֨ר שֵׁ֤ם הָֽאֶחָד֙ גֵּֽרְשֹׁ֔ם כִּ֣י אָמַ֔ר גֵּ֣ר הָיִ֔יתִי בְּאֶ֖רֶץ נָכְרִיָּֽה:
4and one who was named Eliezer, because [Moses said,] "The God of my father came to my aid and rescued me from Pharaoh's sword." דוְשֵׁ֥ם הָֽאֶחָ֖ד אֱלִיעֶ֑זֶר כִּֽי־אֱלֹהֵ֤י אָבִי֙ בְּעֶזְרִ֔י וַיַּצִּלֵ֖נִי מֵחֶ֥רֶב פַּרְעֹֽה:
and rescued me from Pharaoh’s sword: When Dathan and Abiram informed [Pharaoh] about the incident of the Egyptian [whom Moses had slain], and he [Pharaoh] sought to slay Moses, his [Moses’] neck became [as hard] as a marble pillar. — [from Exod. Rabbah 1:31, Deut. Rabbah 2:27] ויצלני מחרב פרעה: כשגילו דתן ואבירם על דבר המצרי ובקש להרוג את משה, נעשה צוארו כעמוד של שיש:
5Now Moses' father in law, Jethro, and his [Moses'] sons and his wife came to Moses, to the desert where he was encamped, to the mountain of God. הוַיָּבֹ֞א יִתְר֨וֹ חֹתֵ֥ן משֶׁ֛ה וּבָנָ֥יו וְאִשְׁתּ֖וֹ אֶל־משֶׁ֑ה אֶל־הַמִּדְבָּ֕ר אֲשֶׁר־ה֛וּא חֹנֶ֥ה שָׁ֖ם הַ֥ר הָֽאֱלֹהִֽים:
to the desert: [We too know that he was in the desert [without the text stating it explicitly], but the text is speaking of Jethro’s praise, that he lived amidst the greatest honor of the world, but his heart prompted him to go forth to the desert wasteland to hear words of Torah. — [from Mechilta] אל המדבר: אף אנו יודעין שבמדבר היו, אלא בשבחו של יתרו דבר הכתוב, שהיה יושב בכבודו של עולם ונדבו לבו לצאת אל המדבר, מקום תהו, לשמוע דברי תורה:
6And he said to Moses, "I, Jethro, your father in law, am coming to you, and [so is] your wife and her two sons with her. " ווַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֲנִ֛י חֹֽתֶנְךָ֥ יִתְר֖וֹ בָּ֣א אֵלֶ֑יךָ וְאִ֨שְׁתְּךָ֔ וּשְׁנֵ֥י בָנֶ֖יהָ עִמָּֽהּ:
And he said to Moses: through a messenger. — [from Mechilta, view of Rabbi Eleazar the Modite] ויאמר אל משה: על ידי שליח:
I, Jethro, your father-in-law…: If you will not come out for my sake, come out for your wife’s sake, and if you will not come out for your wife’s sake, come out for the sake of her two sons. — [from Mechilta] אני חתנך יתרו וגו': אם אין אתה יוצא בגיני צא בגין אשתך, ואם אין אתה יוצא בגין אשתך צא בגין שני בניה:
7So Moses went out toward Jethro, prostrated himself and kissed him, and they greeted one another, and they entered the tent. זוַיֵּצֵ֨א משֶׁ֜ה לִקְרַ֣את חֹֽתְנ֗וֹ וַיִּשְׁתַּ֨חוּ֙ וַיִּשַּׁק־ל֔וֹ וַיִּשְׁאֲל֥וּ אִֽישׁ־לְרֵעֵ֖הוּ לְשָׁל֑וֹם וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ הָאֹֽהֱלָה:
So Moses went out: Jethro was afforded great honor at that time. Since Moses went out, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu also went out, and who [was it who] saw these [men] going out and did not go out? [Thus, everyone went out to greet Jethro.]-[from unknown midrashic source similar to Mechilta and Tanchuma Yithro 6] ויצא משה: כבוד גדול נתכבד יתרו באותה שעה, כיון שיצא משה יצא אהרן נדב ואביהוא, ומי הוא שראה את אלו יוצאין ולא יצא:
prostrated himself and kissed him: I do not know who prostrated himself to whom. [But] when it says, “one another (אִישׁ לְרֵעֵהוּ),” [lit., a man to his friend,] who is called "a man"? This is Moses, as it is said: “But the man (וְהָאִישׁ) Moses” (Num. 12:3). [from Mechilta] וישתחו וישק לו: איני יודע מי השתחוה למי, כשהוא אומר איש לרעהו, מי הקרוי איש, זה משה, שנאמר (במדבר יב ג) והאיש משה:
8Moses told his father in law [about] all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians on account of Israel, [and about] all the hardships that had befallen them on the way, and [that] the Lord had saved them. חוַיְסַפֵּ֤ר משֶׁה֙ לְחֹ֣תְנ֔וֹ אֵת֩ כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשָׂ֤ה יְהוָֹה֙ לְפַרְעֹ֣ה וּלְמִצְרַ֔יִם עַ֖ל אוֹדֹ֣ת יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל אֵ֤ת כָּל־הַתְּלָאָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר מְצָאָ֣תַם בַּדֶּ֔רֶךְ וַיַּצִּלֵ֖ם יְהוָֹֽה:
Moses told his father-in-law: to attract his heart, to draw him near to the Torah. — [from Mechilta] ויספר משה לחתנו: למשוך את לבו לקרבו לתורה:
all the hardships: By the sea and [the hardship] of Amalek. — [from Mechilta] את כל התלאה: שעל הים ושל עמלק:
the hardships: Heb. הַתְּלָאָה. “Lammed aleph” comprise the root of the word. The “tav” is both formative and basic and sometimes is omitted from it. Similarly, separation (תְּרוּמָה), waving (תְּנוּפָה), rising (תְּקוּמָה), removing (תְּנוּאָה). התלאה: למ"ד אל"ף מן היסוד של התיבה והתי"ו הוא תיקון ויסוד הנופל ממנו לפרקים, וכן תרומה, תנופה, תקומה, תנואה:
9Jethro was happy about all the good that the Lord had done for Israel, that He had rescued them from the hands of the Egyptians. טוַיִּ֣חַדְּ יִתְר֔וֹ עַ֚ל כָּל־הַטּוֹבָ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה יְהוָֹ֖ה לְיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר הִצִּיל֖וֹ מִיַּ֥ד מִצְרָֽיִם:
Jethro was happy: Heb. וַיִחַדּ, and Jethro rejoiced. This is its simple meaning. The Aggadic midrash, however, [explains that] his flesh became prickly [i.e., gooseflesh (חִדּוּדִין חִדּוּדִּין)] [because] he was upset about the destruction of the Egyptians. This is [the source of] the popular saying: Do not disgrace a gentile in the presence of a convert, [even] up to the tenth generation [after the conversion]. — [from Sanh. 94a] ויחד יתרו: וישמח יתרו, זהו פשוטו ומדרשו נעשה בשרו חדודין חדודין, מיצר על איבוד מצרים, היינו דאמרי אינשי גיורא עד עשרה דרי לא תבזי ארמאה באפיה:
about all the good: The good of the manna, the well [of water that went with them], and the Torah, and above all, that He rescued them from the hands of the Egyptians. Until now, no slave had been able to escape from Egypt because the [border of the] land was locked, but these [people] fled six hundred thousand strong. — [from Mechilta] על כל הטובה: טובת המן והבאר והתורה. ועל כולן אשר הצילו מיד מצרים, עד עכשיו לא היה עבד יכול לברוח ממצרים, שהיתה הארץ מסוגרת, ואלו יצאו ששים רבוא:
10[Thereupon,] Jethro said, "Blessed is the Lord, Who has rescued you from the hands of the Egyptians and from the hand of Pharaoh, Who has rescued the people from beneath the hand of the Egyptians. יוַיֹּ֘אמֶר֘ יִתְרוֹ֒ בָּר֣וּךְ יְהֹוָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר הִצִּ֥יל אֶתְכֶ֛ם מִיַּ֥ד מִצְרַ֖יִם וּמִיַּ֣ד פַּרְעֹ֑ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר הִצִּיל֙ אֶת־הָעָ֔ם מִתַּ֖חַת יַד־מִצְרָֽיִם:
Who has rescued you from the hands of the Egyptians: A strong nation. אשר הציל אתכם מיד מצרים: אומה קשה:
and from the hand of Pharaoh: A strong king. ומיד פרעה: מלך קשה:
from beneath the hand of the Egyptians: As the Targum [Onkelos] renders: [from beneath the control of the Egyptians,] an expression of tyrannization and domination. [The verse is referring to] the hand, which they [the Egyptians] laid heavily upon you [the Israelites]; the slavery. מתחת יד מצרים: כתרגומו לשון רידוי ומרות היד שהיו מכבידים עליהם, היא העבודה:
11Now I know that the Lord is greater than all the deities, for with the thing that they plotted, [He came] upon them." יאעַתָּ֣ה יָדַ֔עְתִּי כִּֽי־גָד֥וֹל יְהוָֹ֖ה מִכָּל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים כִּ֣י בַדָּבָ֔ר אֲשֶׁ֥ר זָד֖וּ עֲלֵיהֶֽם:
Now I know: I recognized Him in the past, but now [I recognize Him] even more. — [from Mechilta] עתה ידעתי: מכירו הייתי לשעבר ועכשיו ביותר:
than all the deities: This teaches us that he [Jethro] was knowledgeable about every type of idolatry in the world, and there was no pagan deity that he did not worship. — [from Mechilta] מכל הא-להים: מלמד שהיה מכיר בכל עבודה זרה שבעולם שלא הניח עבודה זרה שלא עבדה:
for with the thing that they plotted, [He came] upon them: Heb. זָדוּ. [To be explained] according to its [Aramaic] translation. [Onkelos renders: For with the thing that the Egyptians plotted to judge Israel, with that He judged them.] With water, they planned to destroy them, and they [themselves] were destroyed with water. כי בדבר אשר זדו עליהם: כתרגומו במים דמו לאבדם והם נאבדו במים:
that they plotted: That they planned wickedly. Our Rabbis, however, interpreted it [זָדוּ] as an expression related to “Now Jacob cooked (וַיָזֶר)” (Gen. 25:29) [and thus to infer that] in the very pot in which they cooked, they themselves were cooked. [from Sotah 11a] אשר זדו: אשר הרשיעו. ורבותינו דרשוהו לשון (בראשית כה כט) ויזד יעקב נזיד, בקדרה אשר בשלו בה, נתבשלו:
12Then Moses' father in law, Jethro, sacrificed burnt offering[s] and [peace] offerings to God, and Aaron and all the elders of Israel came to dine with Moses' father in law before God. יבוַיִּקַּ֞ח יִתְר֨וֹ חֹתֵ֥ן משֶׁ֛ה עֹלָ֥ה וּזְבָחִ֖ים לֵֽאלֹהִ֑ים וַיָּבֹ֨א אַֽהֲרֹ֜ן וְכֹ֣ל | זִקְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לֶֽאֱכָל־לֶ֛חֶם עִם־חֹתֵ֥ן משֶׁ֖ה לִפְנֵ֥י הָֽאֱלֹהִֽים:
burnt offering[s]: Heb. עֹלָה. As its apparent meaning, because it [the offering] was completely (כֻּלָּה) burned [on the altar]. עלה: כמשמעה שהיא עולה כליל:
and [peace] offerings: Peace offerings. וזבחים: שלמים:
And Aaron came: And where did Moses go? [Why is he not mentioned here as partaking of the feast?] He was standing and serving them. — [from Mechilta, Jonathan] ויבא אהרן וגו': ומשה היכן הלך, והלא הוא שיצא לקראתו וגרם לו את כל הכבוד, אלא שהיה עומד ומשמש לפניהם:
before God: From here [we learn] that if one derives pleasure from a feast at which Torah scholars are seated, it is as if he has derived pleasure from the splendor of the Shechinah. — [from Ber. 64a, Mechilta] לפני הא-להים: מכאן שהנהנה מסעודה שתלמידי חכמים מסובין בה כאלו נהנה מזיו השכינה:
• Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 79 - 82
• Chapter 79
In this psalm, Asaph thanks God for sparing the people and directing His wrath upon the wood and stones (of the Temple). Still he cries bitterly, mourning the immense destruction: The place where the High Priest alone was allowed to enter-and only on Yom Kippur-is now so desolate that foxes stroll through it!
1. A psalm by Asaph. O God, nations have entered Your inheritance, they defiled Your Holy Sanctuary; they turned Jerusalem into heaps of rubble.
2. They have rendered the corpses of Your servants as food for the birds of heaven, the flesh of Your pious ones for the beasts of the earth.
3. They spilled their blood like water around Jerusalem, and there is no one to bury [them].
4. We became the object of disgrace to our neighbors, ridicule and scorn to those around us.
5. Until when, O Lord! Will You be angry forever? Will Your jealousy burn like fire?
6. Pour Your wrath upon the nations that do not know You, upon the kingdoms that do not call Your Name,
7. for they devoured Jacob and desolated His abode.
8. Do not recall our former sins; let Your mercies come swiftly towards us, for we have fallen very low.
9. Help us, God of our deliverance, for the sake of the glory of Your Name; save us and pardon our sins for the sake of Your Name.
10. Why should the nations say, "Where is their God?" Let there be known among the nations, before our eyes, the retribution of the spilled blood of Your servants.
11. Let the groan of the prisoner come before You; liberate those condemned to death, as befits the greatness of Your strength.
12. Repay our neighbors sevenfold into their bosom, for the disgrace with which they reviled You, O Lord.
13. And we, Your people, the flock of Your pasture, will thank You forever; for all generations we will recount Your praise.
Chapter 80
An awe-inspiring prayer imploring God to draw near to us as in days of old.
1. For the Conductor, on the shoshanim, 1 a testimony by Asaph, a psalm.
2. Listen, O Shepherd of Israel, Who leads Joseph like sheep. Appear, You Who is enthroned upon the cherubim.
3. Arouse Your might before Ephraim, Benjamin and Menashe, for it is upon You to save us.
4. Return us, O God; cause Your countenance to shine, that we may be saved.
5. O Lord, God of Hosts, until when will You fume at the prayer of Your people?
6. You fed them bread of tears, and gave them tears to drink in great measure.
7. You have made us an object of strife to our neighbors; our enemies mock to themselves.
8. Return us, O God of Hosts; cause Your countenance to shine, that we may be saved.
9. You brought a vine out of Egypt; You drove out nations and planted it.
10. You cleared space before it; it took root and filled the land.
11. Mountains were covered by its shade, and its branches became mighty cedars.
12. It sent forth its branches till the sea, and its tender shoots to the river.
13. Why did You breach its fences, so that every passerby plucked its fruit?
14. The boars of the forest ravage it, and the creepers of the field feed upon it.
15. O God of Hosts, please return! Look down from heaven and see, and be mindful of this vine,
16. and of the foundation which Your right hand has planted, and the son whom You strengthened for Yourself.
17. It is burned by fire, cut down; they perish at the rebuke of Your Presence.
18. Let Your hand be upon the man of Your right hand, upon the son of man whom You strengthened for Yourself.
19. Then we will not withdraw from You; revive us, and we will proclaim Your Name.
20. O Lord, God of Hosts, return us; cause Your countenance to shine that we may be saved.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument shaped like a shoshana, a rose (Metzudot).
Chapter 81
This psalm was chanted in the Holy Temple on Rosh Hashanah, a day on which many miracles were wrought for Israel.
1. For the Conductor, upon the gittit,1 by Asaph.
2. Sing joyously to God, our strength; sound the shofar to the God of Jacob.
3. Raise your voice in song, sound the drum, the pleasant harp, and the lyre.
4. Blow the shofar on the New Month, on the designated day of our Holy Day;
5. for it is a decree for Israel, a ruling of the God of Jacob.
6. He ordained it as a precept for Joseph when he went forth over the land of Egypt; I heard a language which I did not know.
7. I have taken his shoulder from the burden; his hands were removed from the pot.2
8. In distress you called and I delivered you; [you called] in secret, and I answered you with thunderous wonders; I tested you at the waters of Merivah, Selah.
9. Hear, My people, and I will admonish you; Israel, if you would only listen to Me!
10. You shall have no alien god within you, nor shall you bow down to a foreign deity.
11. I am the Lord your God who brought you up from the land of Egypt; open wide your mouth, [state all your desires,] and I shall grant them.
12. But My people did not heed My voice; Israel did not want [to listen to] Me.
13. So I sent them away for the willfulness of their heart, for following their [evil] design.
14. If only My people would listen to Me, if Israel would only walk in My ways,
15. then I would quickly subdue their enemies, and turn My hand against their oppressors.
16. Those who hate the Lord would shrivel before Him, and the time [of their retribution] shall be forever.
17. I would feed him [Israel] with the finest of wheat, and sate you with honey from the rock.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument crafted in Gath (Metzudot).
2.The cooking vessels used to prepare food for their captors (Rashi)
Chapter 82
This psalm admonishes those judges who feign ignorance of the law, dealing unjustly with the pauper or the orphan, while coddling the rich and pocketing their bribes.
1. A psalm by Asaph. God stands in the council of judges; among the judges He renders judgment:
2. How long will you judge wickedly, ever showing partiality toward the evildoers?
3. Render justice to the needy and the orphan; deal righteously with the poor and the destitute.
4. Rescue the needy and the pauper; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
5. But they do not know, nor do they understand; they go about in darkness, [therefore] all the foundations of the earth tremble.
6. I said that you are angels, supernal beings, all of you;
7. but you will die as mortals, you will fall like any prince.
8. Arise, O God, judge the earth, for You possess all the nations.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 24
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Sunday, 16 Shevat, 5777 · 12 February 2017
• Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 24
• ומה שפיקוח נפש דוחה שאר עבירות וגם יעבור ואל יהרג
• Rambam - Sunday, 16 Shevat, 5777 · 12 February 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.
Positive Commandment 95
The Nullification of Vows
We are commanded to practice the Torah-mandated procedure in the event that a vow is to be annulled.
(This commandment is somewhat based on the verse [Numbers 30:3] "he shall not profane his word," from which the Sages deduce that the one who enacted the vow may not profane his own word, but others – such as a sa or rabbinical court – may do so. Nevertheless, the Talmud says that the "annulment of vows flies in the air, with no [explicit biblical] support...")
The Torah explicitly tells us that a husband and father can nullify vows, and tradition teaches that a sage, too, has the power to do so.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• The Nullification of Vows
Positive Commandment 95
Translated by Berel Bell
The 95th mitzvah is that we are commanded regarding the annulment of vows.
This does not mean that there is a commandment to annul vows, but rather that there are certain laws to be followed when doing so. You should keep this principle in mind whenever a mitzvah is enumerated — it does not necessarily mean that we are commanded to perform a certain action, but rather that a certain case [whenever it comes up,] must be judged according to certain laws.
The annulment of vows done by a father [to his daughter] and a husband [to his wife] is explained in the Torah1 in detail.
Furthermore, we know from the Oral Tradition that a Torah scholar can nullify anyone's vow or oath. This is hinted to in the verse,2 "He must not nullify his word." [The Sages3 explain,] "He may not nullify his word, but others may nullify it for him." The final conclusion is that there is no real source in Scripture [for the Torah scholar's power to annul a vow, and the verse quoted above is only a hint]. As our Sages4 put it, "The laws regarding the annulment of vows [by a Torah scholar] are flying in the air, with nothing to support them" — except in the Oral Tradition.
The details of this mitzvah are found in the tractate devoted to this subject, tractate Nedarim.
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 30:4-17.
2.Num. 30:3.
3.Berachos 32a; Chagigah 10a.
4.Chagigah ibid.
• Positive Commandment 92
The Nazirite's Hair
"He shall let the locks of hair on his head grow"—Numbers 6:5.
A nazirite is commanded to allow the hair on his head to grow unimpeded.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• The Nazirite's Hair
Positive Commandment 92
Translated by Berel Bell
The 92nd mitzvah is that a Nazirite is commanded to let his hair grow [for the duration of his Nazirite vow].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "He must let his hair grow long."
In the words of the Mechilta, "The words,2 'he shall be holy' teach us that he should be in a state of holiness when it grows. The words, 'he must let [his hair] grow long' makes this a positive commandment. What is the source of the prohibition?3 The verse,4 'no cutting instrument shall come upon his head.' "
There it also says, "Who is covered by the positive commandment [and not covered by the prohibition]? One who rubs earth or applies depilatories on his head." The meaning of this statement: a Nazirite who places a depilatory on his head does not transgress a prohibition, since a cutting instrument was not used. He will, however, violate the positive commandment, "he must let his hair grow long," since he did not allow it to grow.
[This counts as a positive commandment because] according to our principles, a prohibition which stems from a positive commandment is counted as a positive commandment.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in a number of passages in tractate Nazir.
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 6:5.
2.Ibid.
3.See N209 below.
4.Ibid.
• Negative Commandment 209
Shaving a Nazirite
"A razor shall not go over his head"—Numbers 6:5.
A nazirite must not shave – even one hair off – his head with a razor. This prohibition also precludes another from shaving the nazirite's head.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Shaving a Nazirite
Negative Commandment 209
Translated by Berel Bell
The 209th prohibition is that a Nazirite is forbidden to cut his hair.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "No cutting instrument shall come upon his head."
The one who cuts the Nazirite's hair also receives lashes, since the one who cuts and the one whose hair is cut are both treated the same.2 The punishment of lashes applies as soon as one hair is cut.3
All the details of this mitzvah are explained in the tractate devoted to this subject [tractate Nazir].
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid.
2.Nazir 44a.
3.Ibid. 40a.
• Rambam - 1 Chapter: Mechirah Mechirah - Chapter Five
• Mechirah - Chapter Five
• Nedarim - Chapter 13
• Sunday, 16 Shevat, 5777 · 12 February 2017
• "Today's Day"
• Friday, Sh'vat 16, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: B'shalach, Shishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 79-82.
Tanya: These "contractions" (p. 89)...to no account whatever.(p.89).
My father said: Coldness and heresy are separated by so slender a barrier! It is said, "For the Eternal your G-d is a consuming fire."1 G-dliness is a flame of fire. Learning Torah and davening must be with a blazing heart, that "all my bones may utter"2 the words of G-d in Torah and prayer.
FOOTNOTES
1.Devarim 4:24.
2.Tehillim 35:10.
• Daily Thought:
Dark Paths of Wisdom
He could have placed streetlamps along all the pathways of wisdom,
but then there would be no journey.
Who would discover the secret passages, the hidden treasures, if all of us took the king’s highway?[Likutei Sichot vol. 16, pg. 365, and in many other talks on the difference between the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds.]
• Exodus Chapter 18
1Now Moses' father in law, Jethro, the chieftain of Midian, heard all that God had done for Moses and for Israel, His people that the Lord had taken Israel out of Egypt. אוַיִּשְׁמַ֞ע יִתְר֨וֹ כֹהֵ֤ן מִדְיָן֙ חֹתֵ֣ן משֶׁ֔ה אֵת֩ כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשָׂ֤ה אֱלֹהִים֙ לְמשֶׁ֔ה וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל עַמּ֑וֹ כִּֽי־הוֹצִ֧יא יְהוָֹ֛ה אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מִמִּצְרָֽיִם:
Now…Jethro…heard: What news did he hear that [made such an impression that] he came? The splitting of the Red Sea and the war with Amalek. — [from Zev. 116a, and Mechilta, combining the views of Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Eliezer] וישמע יתרו: מה שמועה שמע ובא, קריעת ים סוף ומלחמת עמלק:
Jethro: He was called by seven names: Reuel, Jether, Jethro [i.e., Yithro], Hobab, Heber, Keni, [and] Putiel (Mechilta). [He was called] Jether (יֶתֶר) because he [caused] a section to be added (יִתֵּר) to the Torah [namely]: “But you shall choose” (below verse 21). [He was called] Jethro (יִתְרוֹ) [to indicate that] when he converted and fulfilled the commandments, a letter was added to his name. [He was called] Hobab (חוֹבָב) [which means lover] because he loved (חִבָּב) the Torah. Hobab was indeed Jethro, as it is said: “of the children of Hobab, Moses’ father-in-law” (Jud. 4:11). Others say that Reuel was Jethro’s father. [If so,] what [is the meaning of] what it [Scripture] says [referring to the daughters of Jethro]: “They came to their father Reuel” (Exod. 2:18)? Because [young] children call their grandfather “Father.” [This appears] in Sifrei (Beha’alothecha 10:29). יתרו: שבע שמות נקראו לו רעואל, יתר, יתרו, חובב, חבר, קיני, פוטיאל. יתר, על שם שיתר פרשה אחת בתורה (להלן פסוק כא) ואתה תחזה. יתרו לכשנתגייר וקיים המצות הוסיפו לו אות אחת על שמו. חובב שחבב את התורה. וחובב הוא יתרו, שנאמר (שופטים ד יא) מבני חובב חותן משה. ויש אומרים רעואל אביו של יתרו היה, ומה הוא אומר (שמות ב יח) ותבאנה אל רעואל אביהן, שהתינוקות קורין לאבי אביהן אבא. בספרי:
Moses’ father-in-law: Here Jethro prides himself on [his relationship to] Moses, [saying,] “I am the king’s father-in-law.” In the past, Moses attributed the greatness to his father-in-law, as it is said: “Moses went and returned to Jether, his father-in-law” (Exod. 4:18). [from Mechilta] חתן משה: כאן היה יתרו מתכבד במשה, אני חותן המלך ולשעבר היה משה תולה הגדולה בחמיו, שנאמר (שמות ד יח) וישב אל יתר חותנו:
for Moses and for Israel: Moses was equal to all of Israel. [Mechilta] למשה ולישראל: שקול משה כנגד כל ישראל:
all that…had done: for them with the descent of the manna, with the well, and with Amalek. את כל אשר עשה: להם בירידת המן ובבאר ובעמלק:
that the Lord had taken Israel out…: This was the greatest of them all. — [from Mechilta] כי הוציא ה' וגו': זו גדולה על כולם:
2So Moses' father in law, Jethro, took Zipporah, Moses' wife, after she had been sent away, בוַיִּקַּ֗ח יִתְרוֹ֙ חֹתֵ֣ן משֶׁ֔ה אֶת־צִפֹּרָ֖ה אֵ֣שֶׁת משֶׁ֑ה אַחַ֖ר שִׁלּוּחֶֽיהָ:
after she had been sent away: When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him in Midian, “Go, return to Egypt” (Exod. 4: 19), “and Moses took his wife and his sons, etc.” (Exod. 4:20), and Aaron went forth “and met him on the mount of God” (Exod. 4:27), he [Aaron] said to him [Moses], “Who are these?” He [Moses] replied, “This is my wife, whom I married in Midian, and these are my sons.” "And where are you taking them?" he [Aaron] asked. “To Egypt,” he replied. He [Aaron] retorted, “We are suffering with the first ones, and you come to add to them?” He [Moses] said to her [Zipporah], “Go home to your father.” She took her two sons and went away. — [from Mechilta] אחר שלוחיה: כשאמר לו הקב"ה במדין (שמות ד יט) לך שוב מצרימה, (שם כ) ויקח משה את אשתו ואת בניו גו' ויצא אהרן לקראתו, (שם כז) ויפגשהו בהר הא-להים. אמר לו מי הם הללו. אמר לו זו היא אשתי שנשאתי במדין ואלו בני. אמר לו והיכן אתה מוליכן. אמר לו למצרים. אמר לו על הראשונים אנו מצטערים ואתה בא להוסיף עליהם. אמר לה לכי אל בית אביך, נטלה שני בניה והלכה לה:
3and her two sons, one of whom was named Gershom, because he [Moses] said, "I was a stranger in a foreign land," גוְאֵ֖ת שְׁנֵ֣י בָנֶ֑יהָ אֲשֶׁ֨ר שֵׁ֤ם הָֽאֶחָד֙ גֵּֽרְשֹׁ֔ם כִּ֣י אָמַ֔ר גֵּ֣ר הָיִ֔יתִי בְּאֶ֖רֶץ נָכְרִיָּֽה:
4and one who was named Eliezer, because [Moses said,] "The God of my father came to my aid and rescued me from Pharaoh's sword." דוְשֵׁ֥ם הָֽאֶחָ֖ד אֱלִיעֶ֑זֶר כִּֽי־אֱלֹהֵ֤י אָבִי֙ בְּעֶזְרִ֔י וַיַּצִּלֵ֖נִי מֵחֶ֥רֶב פַּרְעֹֽה:
and rescued me from Pharaoh’s sword: When Dathan and Abiram informed [Pharaoh] about the incident of the Egyptian [whom Moses had slain], and he [Pharaoh] sought to slay Moses, his [Moses’] neck became [as hard] as a marble pillar. — [from Exod. Rabbah 1:31, Deut. Rabbah 2:27] ויצלני מחרב פרעה: כשגילו דתן ואבירם על דבר המצרי ובקש להרוג את משה, נעשה צוארו כעמוד של שיש:
5Now Moses' father in law, Jethro, and his [Moses'] sons and his wife came to Moses, to the desert where he was encamped, to the mountain of God. הוַיָּבֹ֞א יִתְר֨וֹ חֹתֵ֥ן משֶׁ֛ה וּבָנָ֥יו וְאִשְׁתּ֖וֹ אֶל־משֶׁ֑ה אֶל־הַמִּדְבָּ֕ר אֲשֶׁר־ה֛וּא חֹנֶ֥ה שָׁ֖ם הַ֥ר הָֽאֱלֹהִֽים:
to the desert: [We too know that he was in the desert [without the text stating it explicitly], but the text is speaking of Jethro’s praise, that he lived amidst the greatest honor of the world, but his heart prompted him to go forth to the desert wasteland to hear words of Torah. — [from Mechilta] אל המדבר: אף אנו יודעין שבמדבר היו, אלא בשבחו של יתרו דבר הכתוב, שהיה יושב בכבודו של עולם ונדבו לבו לצאת אל המדבר, מקום תהו, לשמוע דברי תורה:
6And he said to Moses, "I, Jethro, your father in law, am coming to you, and [so is] your wife and her two sons with her. " ווַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֲנִ֛י חֹֽתֶנְךָ֥ יִתְר֖וֹ בָּ֣א אֵלֶ֑יךָ וְאִ֨שְׁתְּךָ֔ וּשְׁנֵ֥י בָנֶ֖יהָ עִמָּֽהּ:
And he said to Moses: through a messenger. — [from Mechilta, view of Rabbi Eleazar the Modite] ויאמר אל משה: על ידי שליח:
I, Jethro, your father-in-law…: If you will not come out for my sake, come out for your wife’s sake, and if you will not come out for your wife’s sake, come out for the sake of her two sons. — [from Mechilta] אני חתנך יתרו וגו': אם אין אתה יוצא בגיני צא בגין אשתך, ואם אין אתה יוצא בגין אשתך צא בגין שני בניה:
7So Moses went out toward Jethro, prostrated himself and kissed him, and they greeted one another, and they entered the tent. זוַיֵּצֵ֨א משֶׁ֜ה לִקְרַ֣את חֹֽתְנ֗וֹ וַיִּשְׁתַּ֨חוּ֙ וַיִּשַּׁק־ל֔וֹ וַיִּשְׁאֲל֥וּ אִֽישׁ־לְרֵעֵ֖הוּ לְשָׁל֑וֹם וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ הָאֹֽהֱלָה:
So Moses went out: Jethro was afforded great honor at that time. Since Moses went out, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu also went out, and who [was it who] saw these [men] going out and did not go out? [Thus, everyone went out to greet Jethro.]-[from unknown midrashic source similar to Mechilta and Tanchuma Yithro 6] ויצא משה: כבוד גדול נתכבד יתרו באותה שעה, כיון שיצא משה יצא אהרן נדב ואביהוא, ומי הוא שראה את אלו יוצאין ולא יצא:
prostrated himself and kissed him: I do not know who prostrated himself to whom. [But] when it says, “one another (אִישׁ לְרֵעֵהוּ),” [lit., a man to his friend,] who is called "a man"? This is Moses, as it is said: “But the man (וְהָאִישׁ) Moses” (Num. 12:3). [from Mechilta] וישתחו וישק לו: איני יודע מי השתחוה למי, כשהוא אומר איש לרעהו, מי הקרוי איש, זה משה, שנאמר (במדבר יב ג) והאיש משה:
8Moses told his father in law [about] all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians on account of Israel, [and about] all the hardships that had befallen them on the way, and [that] the Lord had saved them. חוַיְסַפֵּ֤ר משֶׁה֙ לְחֹ֣תְנ֔וֹ אֵת֩ כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשָׂ֤ה יְהוָֹה֙ לְפַרְעֹ֣ה וּלְמִצְרַ֔יִם עַ֖ל אוֹדֹ֣ת יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל אֵ֤ת כָּל־הַתְּלָאָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר מְצָאָ֣תַם בַּדֶּ֔רֶךְ וַיַּצִּלֵ֖ם יְהוָֹֽה:
Moses told his father-in-law: to attract his heart, to draw him near to the Torah. — [from Mechilta] ויספר משה לחתנו: למשוך את לבו לקרבו לתורה:
all the hardships: By the sea and [the hardship] of Amalek. — [from Mechilta] את כל התלאה: שעל הים ושל עמלק:
the hardships: Heb. הַתְּלָאָה. “Lammed aleph” comprise the root of the word. The “tav” is both formative and basic and sometimes is omitted from it. Similarly, separation (תְּרוּמָה), waving (תְּנוּפָה), rising (תְּקוּמָה), removing (תְּנוּאָה). התלאה: למ"ד אל"ף מן היסוד של התיבה והתי"ו הוא תיקון ויסוד הנופל ממנו לפרקים, וכן תרומה, תנופה, תקומה, תנואה:
9Jethro was happy about all the good that the Lord had done for Israel, that He had rescued them from the hands of the Egyptians. טוַיִּ֣חַדְּ יִתְר֔וֹ עַ֚ל כָּל־הַטּוֹבָ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה יְהוָֹ֖ה לְיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר הִצִּיל֖וֹ מִיַּ֥ד מִצְרָֽיִם:
Jethro was happy: Heb. וַיִחַדּ, and Jethro rejoiced. This is its simple meaning. The Aggadic midrash, however, [explains that] his flesh became prickly [i.e., gooseflesh (חִדּוּדִין חִדּוּדִּין)] [because] he was upset about the destruction of the Egyptians. This is [the source of] the popular saying: Do not disgrace a gentile in the presence of a convert, [even] up to the tenth generation [after the conversion]. — [from Sanh. 94a] ויחד יתרו: וישמח יתרו, זהו פשוטו ומדרשו נעשה בשרו חדודין חדודין, מיצר על איבוד מצרים, היינו דאמרי אינשי גיורא עד עשרה דרי לא תבזי ארמאה באפיה:
about all the good: The good of the manna, the well [of water that went with them], and the Torah, and above all, that He rescued them from the hands of the Egyptians. Until now, no slave had been able to escape from Egypt because the [border of the] land was locked, but these [people] fled six hundred thousand strong. — [from Mechilta] על כל הטובה: טובת המן והבאר והתורה. ועל כולן אשר הצילו מיד מצרים, עד עכשיו לא היה עבד יכול לברוח ממצרים, שהיתה הארץ מסוגרת, ואלו יצאו ששים רבוא:
10[Thereupon,] Jethro said, "Blessed is the Lord, Who has rescued you from the hands of the Egyptians and from the hand of Pharaoh, Who has rescued the people from beneath the hand of the Egyptians. יוַיֹּ֘אמֶר֘ יִתְרוֹ֒ בָּר֣וּךְ יְהֹוָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר הִצִּ֥יל אֶתְכֶ֛ם מִיַּ֥ד מִצְרַ֖יִם וּמִיַּ֣ד פַּרְעֹ֑ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר הִצִּיל֙ אֶת־הָעָ֔ם מִתַּ֖חַת יַד־מִצְרָֽיִם:
Who has rescued you from the hands of the Egyptians: A strong nation. אשר הציל אתכם מיד מצרים: אומה קשה:
and from the hand of Pharaoh: A strong king. ומיד פרעה: מלך קשה:
from beneath the hand of the Egyptians: As the Targum [Onkelos] renders: [from beneath the control of the Egyptians,] an expression of tyrannization and domination. [The verse is referring to] the hand, which they [the Egyptians] laid heavily upon you [the Israelites]; the slavery. מתחת יד מצרים: כתרגומו לשון רידוי ומרות היד שהיו מכבידים עליהם, היא העבודה:
11Now I know that the Lord is greater than all the deities, for with the thing that they plotted, [He came] upon them." יאעַתָּ֣ה יָדַ֔עְתִּי כִּֽי־גָד֥וֹל יְהוָֹ֖ה מִכָּל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים כִּ֣י בַדָּבָ֔ר אֲשֶׁ֥ר זָד֖וּ עֲלֵיהֶֽם:
Now I know: I recognized Him in the past, but now [I recognize Him] even more. — [from Mechilta] עתה ידעתי: מכירו הייתי לשעבר ועכשיו ביותר:
than all the deities: This teaches us that he [Jethro] was knowledgeable about every type of idolatry in the world, and there was no pagan deity that he did not worship. — [from Mechilta] מכל הא-להים: מלמד שהיה מכיר בכל עבודה זרה שבעולם שלא הניח עבודה זרה שלא עבדה:
for with the thing that they plotted, [He came] upon them: Heb. זָדוּ. [To be explained] according to its [Aramaic] translation. [Onkelos renders: For with the thing that the Egyptians plotted to judge Israel, with that He judged them.] With water, they planned to destroy them, and they [themselves] were destroyed with water. כי בדבר אשר זדו עליהם: כתרגומו במים דמו לאבדם והם נאבדו במים:
that they plotted: That they planned wickedly. Our Rabbis, however, interpreted it [זָדוּ] as an expression related to “Now Jacob cooked (וַיָזֶר)” (Gen. 25:29) [and thus to infer that] in the very pot in which they cooked, they themselves were cooked. [from Sotah 11a] אשר זדו: אשר הרשיעו. ורבותינו דרשוהו לשון (בראשית כה כט) ויזד יעקב נזיד, בקדרה אשר בשלו בה, נתבשלו:
12Then Moses' father in law, Jethro, sacrificed burnt offering[s] and [peace] offerings to God, and Aaron and all the elders of Israel came to dine with Moses' father in law before God. יבוַיִּקַּ֞ח יִתְר֨וֹ חֹתֵ֥ן משֶׁ֛ה עֹלָ֥ה וּזְבָחִ֖ים לֵֽאלֹהִ֑ים וַיָּבֹ֨א אַֽהֲרֹ֜ן וְכֹ֣ל | זִקְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לֶֽאֱכָל־לֶ֛חֶם עִם־חֹתֵ֥ן משֶׁ֖ה לִפְנֵ֥י הָֽאֱלֹהִֽים:
burnt offering[s]: Heb. עֹלָה. As its apparent meaning, because it [the offering] was completely (כֻּלָּה) burned [on the altar]. עלה: כמשמעה שהיא עולה כליל:
and [peace] offerings: Peace offerings. וזבחים: שלמים:
And Aaron came: And where did Moses go? [Why is he not mentioned here as partaking of the feast?] He was standing and serving them. — [from Mechilta, Jonathan] ויבא אהרן וגו': ומשה היכן הלך, והלא הוא שיצא לקראתו וגרם לו את כל הכבוד, אלא שהיה עומד ומשמש לפניהם:
before God: From here [we learn] that if one derives pleasure from a feast at which Torah scholars are seated, it is as if he has derived pleasure from the splendor of the Shechinah. — [from Ber. 64a, Mechilta] לפני הא-להים: מכאן שהנהנה מסעודה שתלמידי חכמים מסובין בה כאלו נהנה מזיו השכינה:
• Daily Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 79 - 82
• Chapter 79
In this psalm, Asaph thanks God for sparing the people and directing His wrath upon the wood and stones (of the Temple). Still he cries bitterly, mourning the immense destruction: The place where the High Priest alone was allowed to enter-and only on Yom Kippur-is now so desolate that foxes stroll through it!
1. A psalm by Asaph. O God, nations have entered Your inheritance, they defiled Your Holy Sanctuary; they turned Jerusalem into heaps of rubble.
2. They have rendered the corpses of Your servants as food for the birds of heaven, the flesh of Your pious ones for the beasts of the earth.
3. They spilled their blood like water around Jerusalem, and there is no one to bury [them].
4. We became the object of disgrace to our neighbors, ridicule and scorn to those around us.
5. Until when, O Lord! Will You be angry forever? Will Your jealousy burn like fire?
6. Pour Your wrath upon the nations that do not know You, upon the kingdoms that do not call Your Name,
7. for they devoured Jacob and desolated His abode.
8. Do not recall our former sins; let Your mercies come swiftly towards us, for we have fallen very low.
9. Help us, God of our deliverance, for the sake of the glory of Your Name; save us and pardon our sins for the sake of Your Name.
10. Why should the nations say, "Where is their God?" Let there be known among the nations, before our eyes, the retribution of the spilled blood of Your servants.
11. Let the groan of the prisoner come before You; liberate those condemned to death, as befits the greatness of Your strength.
12. Repay our neighbors sevenfold into their bosom, for the disgrace with which they reviled You, O Lord.
13. And we, Your people, the flock of Your pasture, will thank You forever; for all generations we will recount Your praise.
Chapter 80
An awe-inspiring prayer imploring God to draw near to us as in days of old.
1. For the Conductor, on the shoshanim, 1 a testimony by Asaph, a psalm.
2. Listen, O Shepherd of Israel, Who leads Joseph like sheep. Appear, You Who is enthroned upon the cherubim.
3. Arouse Your might before Ephraim, Benjamin and Menashe, for it is upon You to save us.
4. Return us, O God; cause Your countenance to shine, that we may be saved.
5. O Lord, God of Hosts, until when will You fume at the prayer of Your people?
6. You fed them bread of tears, and gave them tears to drink in great measure.
7. You have made us an object of strife to our neighbors; our enemies mock to themselves.
8. Return us, O God of Hosts; cause Your countenance to shine, that we may be saved.
9. You brought a vine out of Egypt; You drove out nations and planted it.
10. You cleared space before it; it took root and filled the land.
11. Mountains were covered by its shade, and its branches became mighty cedars.
12. It sent forth its branches till the sea, and its tender shoots to the river.
13. Why did You breach its fences, so that every passerby plucked its fruit?
14. The boars of the forest ravage it, and the creepers of the field feed upon it.
15. O God of Hosts, please return! Look down from heaven and see, and be mindful of this vine,
16. and of the foundation which Your right hand has planted, and the son whom You strengthened for Yourself.
17. It is burned by fire, cut down; they perish at the rebuke of Your Presence.
18. Let Your hand be upon the man of Your right hand, upon the son of man whom You strengthened for Yourself.
19. Then we will not withdraw from You; revive us, and we will proclaim Your Name.
20. O Lord, God of Hosts, return us; cause Your countenance to shine that we may be saved.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument shaped like a shoshana, a rose (Metzudot).
Chapter 81
This psalm was chanted in the Holy Temple on Rosh Hashanah, a day on which many miracles were wrought for Israel.
1. For the Conductor, upon the gittit,1 by Asaph.
2. Sing joyously to God, our strength; sound the shofar to the God of Jacob.
3. Raise your voice in song, sound the drum, the pleasant harp, and the lyre.
4. Blow the shofar on the New Month, on the designated day of our Holy Day;
5. for it is a decree for Israel, a ruling of the God of Jacob.
6. He ordained it as a precept for Joseph when he went forth over the land of Egypt; I heard a language which I did not know.
7. I have taken his shoulder from the burden; his hands were removed from the pot.2
8. In distress you called and I delivered you; [you called] in secret, and I answered you with thunderous wonders; I tested you at the waters of Merivah, Selah.
9. Hear, My people, and I will admonish you; Israel, if you would only listen to Me!
10. You shall have no alien god within you, nor shall you bow down to a foreign deity.
11. I am the Lord your God who brought you up from the land of Egypt; open wide your mouth, [state all your desires,] and I shall grant them.
12. But My people did not heed My voice; Israel did not want [to listen to] Me.
13. So I sent them away for the willfulness of their heart, for following their [evil] design.
14. If only My people would listen to Me, if Israel would only walk in My ways,
15. then I would quickly subdue their enemies, and turn My hand against their oppressors.
16. Those who hate the Lord would shrivel before Him, and the time [of their retribution] shall be forever.
17. I would feed him [Israel] with the finest of wheat, and sate you with honey from the rock.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument crafted in Gath (Metzudot).
2.The cooking vessels used to prepare food for their captors (Rashi)
Chapter 82
This psalm admonishes those judges who feign ignorance of the law, dealing unjustly with the pauper or the orphan, while coddling the rich and pocketing their bribes.
1. A psalm by Asaph. God stands in the council of judges; among the judges He renders judgment:
2. How long will you judge wickedly, ever showing partiality toward the evildoers?
3. Render justice to the needy and the orphan; deal righteously with the poor and the destitute.
4. Rescue the needy and the pauper; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
5. But they do not know, nor do they understand; they go about in darkness, [therefore] all the foundations of the earth tremble.
6. I said that you are angels, supernal beings, all of you;
7. but you will die as mortals, you will fall like any prince.
8. Arise, O God, judge the earth, for You possess all the nations.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 24
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Sunday, 16 Shevat, 5777 · 12 February 2017
• Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 24
• ומה שפיקוח נפש דוחה שאר עבירות וגם יעבור ואל יהרג
True, we find a principle that saving a life overrides other prohibitions though not the prohibition of idolatry; so too the law sometimes calls for one to commit a transgression rather than be killed, whereas with idolatry, incest and murder, the law requires that he submit to death rather than commit any one of the three.
This would seem to indicate that the Torah itself distinguishes between idolatry and most other commandments — while the Alter Rebbe previously stated that the adultress who makes such a distinction has been blinded by a ”spirit of folly,“ for in reality every sin tears one away from G‑d in the same way as idolatry.
In the following paragraph the Alter Rebbe states that there is no contradiction here. The requirement or non-requirement to sacrifice one’s life for a prohibition does not reflect its intrinsic worth.
היינו כפירוש חז״ל: אמרה תורה, חלל עליו שבת אחת כדי שישמור שבתות הרבה
This fact that saving a life overrides other prohibitions is because, as the Sages explain; 1 ”The Torah declares: ‘Desecrate one Shabbat for his sake so that he may live to observe other Shabbatot.’“
When the medical treatment of a patient involves an activity normally forbidden on Shabbat, the Torah requires that we desecrate the Shabbat to cure him so that he may live to observe Shabbat in the future. Thus the precept of Shabbat has not been waived in the face of an external consideration. It is in the interests of the Shabbat itself (i.e., the patient’s future observance of Shabbat) that we desecrate this one Shabbat,
ולא משום קלות העבירות וחומרן
and it is not because of the relative leniency (of the Shabbat) or gravity of the sins (such as idolatry), that one is waived while the other is not.
תדע, שהרי שבת חמורה ושקולה כעבודה זרה לענין שחיטת מומר לדבר אחד, ביורה דעה סימן ב‘
(2This contention is supported by the following fact: Violation of the Shabbat is a grave offense, and comparable to idolatry with regard to the law of Shechitah by anyone who habitually violates a particular precept, as codified in Yoreh Deah, Section 2.
There the Shulchan Aruch states that one who regularly desecrates the Shabbat is unfit for Shechitah, as though he habitually practiced idolatry.
מה שאין כן במומר לגילוי עריות
A habitual sexual offender on the other hand does not have the same law applied to him as a habitual idolator, indicating that the violation of Shabbat is graver than sexual offenses.
ואפילו הכי פיקוח נפש דוחה שבת ולא גילוי עריות
Yet the consideration of life overrides Shabbat, but not the sexual prohibitions.
Thus it cannot be argued that the requirement to sacrifice oneself for the sexual prohibitions is due to their gravity, for we see that the desecration of Shabbat is even graver than them with regard to Shechitah. Hence we must conclude that the laws governing self-sacrifice are no measure of the relative gravity of the mitzvot,
אלא דגזירת הכתוב הוא
but they are simply a matter of Scriptural decree. 3
The sinner, however, who does distinguish between the gravity of the various transgressions, sacrificing his life for the prohibition of idolatry but not even restraining his desire for others, surely has his thinking clouded by the ”spirit of folly“ of the kelipah, which obscures his hidden love of G‑d. For in reality, every transgression creates the ultimate separation between the sinner and G‑d.
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to say that if a difference is indeed to be drawn between the various sins, it is only with regard to their effect after they have taken place.
אלא שלאחר מעשה החטא, אם היא מעבירות שאין בהן כרת ומיתה בידי שמים
After the sinful act, however, if the sin is of the type that carries neither the penalty of karet (spiritual extinction of the soul), or death at the hands of heaven,
שאין נפשו האלקית מתה לגמרי ונכרתת משרשה באלקים חיים
in which case the divine soul does not completely perish and is not entirely cut off from its source in the living G‑d;
רק שנפגם קצת דביקותה ואחיזתה בשרשה בחטא זה
except that through this sin its attachment to its source and its connection with it has been weakened somewhat, in the case of such a sin, the Alter Rebbe concludes (after a parenthetical note), the animal soul and the body can rise out of the kelipah and unite with the holiness of the divine soul.
The difference between — on the one hand — the sins carrying the penalty of karet or death at the hands of heaven, and other sins, is explained elsewhere4 as follows: The connection of the divine soul with its G‑dly source is comparable to a rope woven of 613 strands, each strand representing one of the commandments. Every sin severs a corresponding strand. When one strand is broken, the entire rope is weakened, but not severed entirely. The penalties of karet or death at the hands of heaven, however, cut the rope entirely, so to speak.
* * *
In the following note, the Alter Rebbe states that the varying degrees of severity in the punishments imposed for various sins correspond to the blemish caused by each sin. The purpose of punishment is not the punishment per se, but purification of the soul from the blemish which the sin brought about. Thus, the greater the blemish, the more severe the punishment.
הגהה
ולפי ערך וחלוקי בחינת הפגם בנפש ובשרשה בעליונים
NOTE
Corresponding to the extent and specific nature of the blemish caused by the sin in the soul and in its source in the supernal worlds,
כך הם חלוקי בחינות המירוק והעונש בגיהנם או בעולם הזה
are the various purifying processes and punishments in purgatory or in this world (i.e., the suffering of the soul in purgatory, or one's suffering in this world - whose purpose is to purify the soul),
לכל עון וחטא עונש מיוחד, למרק ולהעביר הלכלוך והפגם
for each transgression and sin its appropriate punishment, for the purpose of cleansing and removing the stain and the blemish caused by that specific sin.
וכן בחייבי מיתה וכרת אין פוגמין כולם בשוה
Similarly, the blemish caused by the sins carrying the penalty of death at the hands of heaven or karet varies from one sin to another.
END OF NOTE
הרי גם נפשו החיונית הבהמית המלובשת בגופו, וכן גופו
(To return to our original point:) After the sinful act, in the case of those sins which do not carry the punishment of karet or death at the hands of heaven, the sinner’s animal soul, which animates the body and is clothed in it, as well as his body itself,
חוזרים ועולים מהסטרא אחרא וקליפה זו ומתקרבים לקדושת נפש האלקית המלובשת בהם
return and rise from the sitra achra and kelipah whereto they descended when the sin was committed, and they draw closer to the holiness of the divine soul that pervades them.
המאמינה בה’ אחד, וגם בשעת החטא היתה באמנה אתו יתברך
The divine soul always believes in the One G‑d, and remains faithful to Him even while the sin is being committed.
For it is only the animal soul, via the body, that performs the sinful act.
רק שהיתה בבחינת גלות ממש תוך נפש הבהמית מסטרא אחרא, המחטיאה את הגוף ומורידתו עמה בעמקי שאול
But at that time, [the divine soul] was in a state of veritable exile in the animal soul — which derives from the sitra achra — which causes the body to sin, and drags it down with itself to the lowest depths;
למטה מטה תחת טומאת הסטרא אחרא וקליפת עבודה זרה, ה‘ ישמרנו
so low, in fact, that it is even lower than the impurity of the sitra achra and the kelipah of idolatry (May G‑d preserve us!).
An exile’s foreign surroundings restrict him from expressing his abilities and ideas. Similarly the divine soul (which is in exile within the animal soul when one sins) is unable to express itself in mastery of the body and in harnessing it for the service of G‑d, by reason of the foreign environment of the kelipah.
ואין לך גלות גדול מזה, מאיגרא רמה כו’
There is no greater exile than this exile of the divine soul within the animal soul, that is brought on through sin. It is a plunge ”from a lofty roof [to a deep pit].“
וכמו שכתוב לעיל, דשרש ומקור נפשות כל בית ישראל הוא מחכמה עילאה, והוא יתברך וחכמתו אחד וכו‘
For, as explained earlier, 5 the source and root of all Jewish souls is in the Divine Wisdom, and G‑d and His wisdom are one and the same... and sin plunges the soul from this lofty plane to the depths of exile within the sitra achra.
והוא כמשל האוחז בראשו של מלך ומורידו למטה וטומן פניו בתוך בית הכסא מלא צואה, שאין לך עלבון גדול מזה, אפילו עושה כן לפי שעה
It is comparable to one who seizes the king’s head, drags it down, and dips his face in a privy full of filth — the ultimate in humiliation, even if he does it only for a moment.
שהקליפות וסטרא אחרא נקראות קיא צואה, כנודע
For the kelipot and sitra achra are called ”vomit and filth,“ as is known.
Similarly, when one seizes the divine soul, which stems from Divine wisdom (”the king’s head“), and through his sins forces it into the kelipah (”a privy full of filth“), he brings upon his soul the most unspeakable humiliation — even if he does so only for a moment (for afterwards the soul rises out of its exile).
We thus see that the differences between the various sins apply only after the sin has been committed. During the act, however, every sin tears one away from G‑d. Since every Jew is endowed with a hidden love of G‑d, by virtue of which he wishes to be constantly united with Him, and never to be separated from Him, not even for a moment, he can employ this hidden love in fulfilling all the mitzvot and in avoiding every sin — as the Alter Rebbe concludes in the following chapter.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Shabbat 151b; Yoma 85b. |
| 2. | Parentheses are in the original text. |
| 3. | Shabbat 151b; Yoma 85b. |
| 4. | Iggeret HaTeshuvah, ch. 5. |
| 5. | Ch. 2. |
• 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.
Positive Commandment 95
The Nullification of Vows
We are commanded to practice the Torah-mandated procedure in the event that a vow is to be annulled.
(This commandment is somewhat based on the verse [Numbers 30:3] "he shall not profane his word," from which the Sages deduce that the one who enacted the vow may not profane his own word, but others – such as a sa or rabbinical court – may do so. Nevertheless, the Talmud says that the "annulment of vows flies in the air, with no [explicit biblical] support...")
The Torah explicitly tells us that a husband and father can nullify vows, and tradition teaches that a sage, too, has the power to do so.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• The Nullification of Vows
Positive Commandment 95
Translated by Berel Bell
The 95th mitzvah is that we are commanded regarding the annulment of vows.
This does not mean that there is a commandment to annul vows, but rather that there are certain laws to be followed when doing so. You should keep this principle in mind whenever a mitzvah is enumerated — it does not necessarily mean that we are commanded to perform a certain action, but rather that a certain case [whenever it comes up,] must be judged according to certain laws.
The annulment of vows done by a father [to his daughter] and a husband [to his wife] is explained in the Torah1 in detail.
Furthermore, we know from the Oral Tradition that a Torah scholar can nullify anyone's vow or oath. This is hinted to in the verse,2 "He must not nullify his word." [The Sages3 explain,] "He may not nullify his word, but others may nullify it for him." The final conclusion is that there is no real source in Scripture [for the Torah scholar's power to annul a vow, and the verse quoted above is only a hint]. As our Sages4 put it, "The laws regarding the annulment of vows [by a Torah scholar] are flying in the air, with nothing to support them" — except in the Oral Tradition.
The details of this mitzvah are found in the tractate devoted to this subject, tractate Nedarim.
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 30:4-17.
2.Num. 30:3.
3.Berachos 32a; Chagigah 10a.
4.Chagigah ibid.
• Positive Commandment 92
The Nazirite's Hair
"He shall let the locks of hair on his head grow"—Numbers 6:5.
A nazirite is commanded to allow the hair on his head to grow unimpeded.
Full text of this Mitzvah »• The Nazirite's Hair
Positive Commandment 92
Translated by Berel Bell
The 92nd mitzvah is that a Nazirite is commanded to let his hair grow [for the duration of his Nazirite vow].
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "He must let his hair grow long."
In the words of the Mechilta, "The words,2 'he shall be holy' teach us that he should be in a state of holiness when it grows. The words, 'he must let [his hair] grow long' makes this a positive commandment. What is the source of the prohibition?3 The verse,4 'no cutting instrument shall come upon his head.' "
There it also says, "Who is covered by the positive commandment [and not covered by the prohibition]? One who rubs earth or applies depilatories on his head." The meaning of this statement: a Nazirite who places a depilatory on his head does not transgress a prohibition, since a cutting instrument was not used. He will, however, violate the positive commandment, "he must let his hair grow long," since he did not allow it to grow.
[This counts as a positive commandment because] according to our principles, a prohibition which stems from a positive commandment is counted as a positive commandment.
The details of this mitzvah are explained in a number of passages in tractate Nazir.
FOOTNOTES
1.Num. 6:5.
2.Ibid.
3.See N209 below.
4.Ibid.
• Negative Commandment 209
Shaving a Nazirite
"A razor shall not go over his head"—Numbers 6:5.
A nazirite must not shave – even one hair off – his head with a razor. This prohibition also precludes another from shaving the nazirite's head.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Shaving a Nazirite
Negative Commandment 209
Translated by Berel Bell
The 209th prohibition is that a Nazirite is forbidden to cut his hair.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "No cutting instrument shall come upon his head."
The one who cuts the Nazirite's hair also receives lashes, since the one who cuts and the one whose hair is cut are both treated the same.2 The punishment of lashes applies as soon as one hair is cut.3
All the details of this mitzvah are explained in the tractate devoted to this subject [tractate Nazir].
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid.
2.Nazir 44a.
3.Ibid. 40a.
• Rambam - 1 Chapter: Mechirah Mechirah - Chapter Five
• Mechirah - Chapter Five
1
The exchange of any movable property brings about a binding transaction. What is implied? If a person exchanges a cow for a donkey, or wine for oil, once one performs meshichah or lifts up the article that he intends to acquire, the other person acquires the second form of movable propertystipulated in the exchange, wherever it is located. It is considered to have entered his domain, even though he has not performed meshichah upon it.
The above applies although both parties to the transaction are particular about the price, have determined how much this article is worth and how much the other article is worth, and exchanged them after making that determination.
א
כל המטלטלין קונין זה את זה כיצד החליף פרה בחמור או יין בשמן אף על פי שמקפידין על הדמים ושיערו כמה שוה זה וכמה שוה זה ואחר כך החליפו כיון שמשך האחד או הגביהו קנה השני המטלטלין האחרים בכל מקום שהם ונעשה ברשותו ואע"פ שעדיין לא משכן:
2
When a person exchanges a donkey for a cow and a lamb, if he performs meshichah on the cow but not on the lamb, the acquisition is not concluded, for he did not complete the meshichah. The same principle applies in all analogous situations.
ב
החליף חמור בפרה וטלה ומשך הפרה ועדיין לא משך את הטלה לא קנה שאין כאן משיכה גמורה וכן כל כיוצא בהן:
3
When one is not precise about the amount of money involved in a transaction, the money is considered in the same way as other types of movable property, and its exchange brings about a binding transaction.
What is implied? A person scooped up coins without weighing them or counting them, but rather took an estimated amount, said: "Sell me your cow...," or "...this wine, for these coins," and gave him the coins, the transaction is completed; neither party may retract.' Since this is an uncommon situation, our Sages did not require the purchaser to perform meshichah.
ג
דמים שאין מקפידין עליהם הרי הן כשאר מטלטלין וקונין כיצד הרי שחפן מעות בלא משקל ובלא מניין אלא נטלן אכסרה ואמר לו מכור לי פרתך או יין זה באלו ונתן לו את הדמים קנה ואין אחד מהם יכול לחזור בו שזה דבר שאינו מצוי הוא ולא הצריכו בו משיכה:
4
Similarly, movable property can be acquired without meshichah in the following situation. Reuven sold movable property to Shimon for 50 zuz. Shimon acquired the movable property and obligated himself to pay Reuven the price agreed upon. After Shimon became obligated to Reuven for these 50 zuz, he desired to sell wine, an animal, a servant or other similar movable property. Reuven told him: "Sell that object to me for the 50 zuz that you owe me for the sale," and Shimon agreed.
Reuven acquires the movable property regardless of where it is located, even though he neither performed meshichah nor lifted the object up. The rationale is that this also is an abnormal circumstance, and our Sages did not require meshichah.
When, by contrast, a person is in debt for reasons other than a sale, and his creditor tells him: "Sell me the movable property for the debt that you owe me," even though both agree, the transaction is not completed until he lifts up the object, performs meshichah on an object that is not usually lifted up, or acquires it through other means by which movable property can be acquired.
ד
וכן ראובן שמכר מטלטלין לשמעון בחמשים זוז וקנה שמעון המטלטלין ונתחייב בדמים ואחר שנתחייב שמעון בחמשים זוז אלו היה לו יין או בהמה או עבד וכיוצא בהן משאר המטלטלין והיה רוצה למכרן ואמר לו ראובן מכור אותו לו בחמשים זוז שיש לי בידך דמי המכר ואמר לו הן קנה ראובן המטלטלין בכל מקום שהן ואף על פי שלא משך ולא הגביה שגם זה דבר שאינו מצוי הוא ולא הצריכו בו משיכה אבל אם היה חוב לו עליו שלא מחמת המכר ואמר לו מכור לי מטלטלין בחוב שיש לי אצלך ורצו שניהם לא קנה עד שיגביה או ימשוך דבר שאין דרכו להגביה או יקנה באחד מהדרכים שהמטלטלין נקנין בה:
5
Landed property, servants, livestock and all other movable property can be acquired through the kinyan referred to as chalifin. This way of finalizing a transaction is so commonly used that it is also referred to as kinyan.
The fundamental manner in which such a transaction is effected is as follows: The purchaser gives the seller any type of article and tells him: "Acquire this article in exchange for the courtyard,..." "...wine,..." "...animal,..."or "...servant that you sold me in exchange for this and this amount of money."
Once this statement is made, when the seller lifts up the article and acquires it, the purchaser acquires that landed property or that movable property even though he did not perform meshichah or pay the money. Neither of the parties involved can retract.
ה
הקרקעות והעבדים והבהמה ושאר כל המטלטלין כל אחד מהן נקנה בחליפין והוא הנקרא קניין ועיקר הדרך הזאת שיתן הקונה למקנה כלי כל שהוא ויאמר לו קנה כלי זה חלף החצר או היין או הבהמה או העבד שמכרת לי בכך וכך כיון שהגביה המוכר את הכלי וקנהו קנה הלוקח אותו הקרקע או אותן המטלטלין אף על פי שעדיין לא משכן ולא נתן הדמים ואחד מהן אין יכול לחזור בו:
6
Such a transaction may be completed only through the use of a utensil. A utensil is effective, however, even if it is not worth a p'rutah.
Such a transaction may not be completed using an article from which it is forbidden to benefit, nor with produce, nor with a coin.
Such a transaction may not be completed using an article belonging to the seller; only one belonging to the purchaser.
ו
אין קונין אלא בכלים ואע"פ שאין בו שוה פרוטה ואין קונין בדבר שאסור בהנאה ולא בפירות ולא במטבע ואין קונין בכליו של מוכר אלא בכליו של לוקח:
7
When a third party transfers a utensil to the seller so that the purchaser will acquire merchandise that was designated, the purchaser acquires it.
Even though he transfers the utensil to him with the intent that it be returned, the transaction is binding, and the purchaser acquires the merchandise intended. For a gift that is given with the stipulation that it be returned is nevertheless considered a gift.
Moreover, even if the seller does not take hold of the entire utensil that was transferred to him in exchange for his merchandise, but rather holds a portion of it, and the person transferring the utensil to him holds the other portion, the purchaser acquires the merchandise, provided he holds a portion of the utensil that can itself be considered to be a utensil, or grabs it in a manner in which he would be able to pull the entire utensil from the hands of the person transferring it into his own possession.
Therefore, if the person transferred a portion of a garment to a purchaser, the purchaser must hold a portion of the garment the size of three fingerbreadths. Thus, if he cuts off the portion that he is holding, it would be considered a utensil in its own right. For a portion of a garment the size of three fingerbreadths is considered a garment, as has been explained with regard to the subject of the ritual impurity of garments. Similarly, if the seller holds on to a portion smaller than three fingerbreadths but could pull the entire garment into his possession, the purchaser acquires the merchandise being sold.
ז
הקנה אחד כלי למוכר כדי שיקנה הלוקח אותו הממכר זכה הלוקח ואף על פי שהקנה לו הכלי על מנת להחזירו נקנה המקח וזכה בו הלוקח שהמתנה על מנת להחזיר שמה מתנה אע"פ שלא תפס המוכר כל הכלי שהקנהו חלף ממכרו אלא אחז מקצתו ואחז המקנה לו מקצתו קנה הלוקח והוא שאחז ממנו כדי שיעור כלי או יאחזנו אחיזה שהוא יכול לנתק את כל הכלי מיד המקנה לו לפיכך אם הקנה לו במקצת הבגד צריך שיאחוז מן הבגד שלש אצבעות שאם יפסוק ממקום שאחז הרי הוא כלי בפני עצמו ששלש אצבעות מבגד קרוי כלי כמו שביארנו בענין טומאת בגדים וכן אם אחז פחות משלש והיה יכול לנתק כל הכלי קנה:
8
The above concepts are reflected in the expression used in legal documents: "And we performed a kinyan with so and so with a utensil that is acceptable to be used to conduct a transaction."
"A utensil" excludes produce and the like. "That is acceptable" excludes objects from which it is forbidden to benefit. And "to be used to conduct a transaction" excludes a utensil belonging to the seller.
ח
זה שכותבין בשטרות וקנינא מפלוני בכלי הכשר לקנות בו בכלי להוציא פירות וכיוצא בהן הכשר להוציא איסורי הנאה לקנות בו להוציא כליו של מוכר:
9
This transaction need not be performed in the presence of witnesses. Instead, even if it was performed only in the presence of the seller and the purchaser, the transaction is finalized. For the only reason the Torah required witnesses with regard to monetary laws is to prevent a person from denying what transpired.
A seller, one who gives a gift, rents out an object, lends an object or the like does not require witnesses. Whenever the second party finalizes the transaction through one of the accepted practices - lifting the article up, meshichah, transferring it, chalifin, the payment of money, the transfer of a legal document or through manifesting ownership - the transaction is concluded, even when there are no witnesses present.
ט
זה הקניין אין צריך להיות בפני עדים אלא אם היה בינו ובין חבירו קנה שלא הצריכה תורה עדים בדיני ממונות אלא לכופר אבל המוכר או הנותן או השוכר או המשאיל וכיוצא בהן אין צריך עדים וכיון שקנה הקונה בדרך אחד מן הדרכים שקונין בהן בין בהגבהה בין במשיכה בין במסירה בין בקנין בין בכסף בין בשטר או בחזקה קנה ואע"פשאין שם עדים:
10
Although a person who sells or gives an article confirms the transaction with a kinyan chalifin, both of them may retract as long as they are discussing the matter. This applies even when the kinyan was performed in the presence of witnesses. If they concluded discussing the matter, neither may retract even though the transaction was not observed by witnesses.
Just as the seller and the giver may retract, so too, the purchaser and the recipient may retract as long as they are discussing the matter. This leniency does not apply with regard to other kinyanim.
י
המוכר או הנותן שקנו מידו יש לכל אחד מהן לחזור בו כל זמן שעוסקין באותו ענין ואף על פי שהקנין בפני עדים ואם הפסיק הענין אין אחד מהם יכול לחזור אע"פ שאין ביניהן עדים וכשם שחוזר המוכר והנותן כך חוזר הלוקח והמקבל כל זמן שעסוקין באותו ענין מה שאין כן בשאר דרכי הקנייה:
11
There are many matters that do not require a kinyan, and indeed there is no reason to perform a kinyan with regard to them - e.g., a person who frees his slave, divorces his wife, appoints an agent, issues a protest with regard to a sale, nullifies a protest or waives a colleague's obligation to pay a debt or return an entrusted object. Similar laws apply to other analogous situations.
יא
יש דברים הרבה שאינן צריכין קנין ואין לקניין בהם טעם כגון המשחרר את עבדו והמגרש אשתו או עושה שליח או המוסר מודעה או המבטל מודעה או המוחל לחבירו חוב או פקדון שיש לו בידו וכל כיוצא בדברים אלו:
12
It has become customary in the majority of places to perform a kinyan to confirm certain of the above matters and the like, even though it is not necessary. The witnesses say: "We performed a kinyan with so and so, confirming that he appointed so and so as an agent," "...waived the debt that so and so owed him," or "...nullified the protest he had issued concerning this bill of divorce," or the like.
יב
נהגו רוב המקומות להקנות למקצת אלו הדברים או כיוצא באלו ואומרים וקנינו מפלוני שעשה פלוני שליח או שמחל לפלוני חוב שיש לו אצלו או שבטל המודעה שמסר על גט זה וכיוצא באלו אף על פי שאינו צריך:
13
Such a kinyan, which is customarily performed with regard to these matters, is of no consequence except to demonstrate that the parties involved were not acting facetiously or in jest when making the statements, but had in fact made a resolution in their hearts before making the statements. Therefore, if a person says: "I am making my statements with a full heart, and I have resolved to do this," nothing else is necessary.
יג
קנין זה שנהגו להקנות באלו הדברים אינו מועיל כלום אלא להודיע שאינו אומר דברים אלו כמשחק ומהתל אלא שגמר בלבו ואח"כ אמר לפיכך אם אמר בלב שלם אני אמרתי וגמרתי לעשות דבר זה אין צריך דבר אחר כלל:
14
A kinyan is of no consequence with regard to statements that are of no substance.
What is implied? If it is stated in a legal document: "We performed a kinyan with so and so, confirming that he will travel to sell merchandise with so and so," "...that they will form a craft partnership," "...that they will divide a field between themselves," or the like, this is considered a kinyan with regard to words, and it is of no consequence. The rationale is that the person did not transfer to his colleague a specific and known entity, neither the entity itself or the fruits of that known entity.
יד
הדברים שאין בהן ממש אין הקנין מועיל בהן כיצד הרי שכתב בשטר וקנינו מפלוני שילך בסחורה עם פלוני או שיחלקו השדה שביניהם או שישתתפו שניהם באומנות וכיוצא בדברים אלו כולן הרי זה קנין דברים ואינו מועיל כלום שהרי לא הקנה לחבירו דבר מסויים וידוע לא עיקר ולא פירות עיקר הידוע:
• Nedarim - Chapter 13
1
A man may nullify or accept the [vows] of his wife or daughter in any language, even though she does not understand it, for the woman need not hear the nullification or the acceptance [of her vow].1
א
מפר אדם או מקיים דברי אשתו או בתו בכל לשון ואע"פ שאינה מכרת שאין האשה צריכה לשמוע ההפרה או הקיום:
2
How does he nullify [the vow]? He says: "It is nullified," "It is void," "This vow is of no consequence,"2 or uses other terms that imply that the vow is nullified from the outset, whether in the woman's presence or in her absence.1
If, however, he tells her: "I cannot bear your taking a vow" or "This is not a vow," he did not nullify it.3 Similarly, if he tells his wife or his daughter: "[Your vow] is forgiven," "[It] is released," "[It] is absolved," or the like, his statements are of no consequence.4 For a father and a husband do not release a vow like a sage does, but instead, uproot the vow from the outset and nullify it.5
ב
וכיצד מפר אומר מופר או בטל או אין נדר זה כלום וכיוצא בדברים שענינם עקירת הנדר מעיקרו בין בפניה בין לאחריה אבל אם אמר לה אי אפשי שתדורי או אין כאן נדר הרי זה לא הפר וכן האומר לאשתו או לבתו מחול ליך או מותר ליך או שרוי ליך וכל כיוצא בענין זה לא אמר כלום שאין האב והבעל מתיר כמו החכם אלא עוקר הנדר מתחלתו ומפירו:
3
How does one express his acceptance of a vow? He says to her: "I uphold your vow," "It was good that you vowed," "There is no one like you," "Had you not taken the vow, I would have administered it to you," or any analogous statement that implies that he is happy with this vow.
ג
וכיצד מקיים כגון שיאמר לה קיים ליכי או יפה נדרת או אין כמותך או אילו לא נדרת הייתי מדירך וכל כיוצא בדברים שמשמען שרצה בנדר זה:
4
When a person voids the vows of his wife or daughter, it is not necessary for him to say anything6 and all of the vows are nullified.
ד
המבטל נדרי אשתו או בתו אינו צריך לומר כלום ונתבטלו כל הנדרים:
5
What is meant by voiding? That he forces her to do something that she forbade herself to do.7 Nullification, by contrast, does not involve forcing her. Instead, he nullifies the vow verbally and allows her [to do as she desires]. If she desires, she may act [in violation of the vow]. If she desires, she need not.8
ה
ומהו הביטול שיכוף אותה לעשות דבר שאסרה אותו אבל ההפרה אינו כופה אותה אלא מפר לה ומניחה אם רצתה עושה ואם רצתה אינה עושה:
6
What is implied? She took a vow or an oath not to eat or not to drink and he told her: "It is nullified for you." It is nullified and she is permitted to eat and to drink. If he took it and gave it to her, saying: "Take this and eat it," "Take this and drink," she may eat and drink and the vow is automatically nullified.9
ו
כיצד נדרה או נשבעה שלא תאכל או שלא תשתה ואמר לה מופר לך הרי זה הפר ומותרת לאכול ולשתות נטל ונתן לה ואמר לה טלי ואכלי טלי ושתי הרי זו אוכלת ושותת והנדר בטל מאליו:
7
When a person nullifies the vows of his wife or daughter, he must make a verbal statement of nullification. If he nullifies it within his heart, [the vow] is not nullified. When, however, he voids [their vows], he does not have to make a verbal statement. Instead, he nullifies the vow in his heart and compels her to perform [the deed]. Whether she performs it or not, the vow is nullified.
ז
המפר נדרי בתו או אשתו צריך להוציא בשפתיו ואם הפר בלבו אינו מופר אבל המבטל אינו צריך להוציא בשפתיו אלא מבטל בלבו בלבד וכופה אותה לעשות בין עשתה בין לא עשתה בטל הנדר:
8
We may nullify vows on the Sabbath, whether for the sake of the Sabbath10 or not.11 On the Sabbath, however, one should not, however, tell [his wife or daughter]: "[Your vow] is nullified," as one would say during the week.12 Instead, he should nullify [the vow] in his heart and tell her: "Take this and eat it," "Take this and drink," or the like.
ח
מפירין נדרים בשבת בין לצורך השבת בין שלא לצורך השבת ולא יאמר לה בשבת מופר ליך כדרך שאומר בחול אלא מבטל בלבו ואומר לה טלי אכלי טלי ושתי וכיוצא בזה:
9
When a person tells his wife or his daughter: "All the vows that you will take from now until I come from this and this place are upheld" or "...are nullified," his words are of no substance.13
If he appointed an agent to nullify her vows or to uphold them, his act is of no substance, as [implied by Numbers 30:14]: "Her husband will uphold them, her husband will nullify them." Similarly, her father must act on his own, not through an agent.
ט
האומר לאשתו או לבתו כל הנדרים שתדורי מכאן ועד שאבוא ממקום פלוני הרי הן קיימין או הרי הן מופרין לא אמר כלום עשה שליח להפר לה או לקיים לה אינו כלום שנאמר אישה יקימנו ואישה יפרנו וכן האב בעצמו ולא בשלוחו:
10
[When a woman takes a vow,] forbidding herself to [partake of] figs and grapes, whether through a vow or through an oath, whether she forbade herself from [partaking of] all types of the species or she said: "These figs and these grapes," if [her husband] upheld [the vow] concerning figs and nullified that concerning grapes or upheld [the vow] concerning grapes and nullified that concerning figs, what he upheld is binding and what he nullified is nullified. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. With regard to the nullification of a vow, we do not say that when a portion of a vow has been nullified, the entire vow is nullified, as is said with regard to the absolution of vows.14
י
אסרה עצמה בתאנים וענבים בין בנדר בין בשבועה בין שאסרה עצמה בכל המין בין שאמרה תאנים וענבים אלו וקיים לתאנים והפר לענבים או שקיים לענבים והפר לתאנים מה שקיים קיים ומה שהפר מופר וכן כל כיוצא בזה ואין אומרין בהפרה נדר שהופר מקצתו הופר כולו כדרך שאומרין בהתרה:
11
יא
מי שנדרה אשתו ושמע והתפיס עצמו בנדרה אינו יכול להפר שהרי קיים לה נדר הוא והתפיסה עצמה בנדרו מפר את שלה ושלו קיים:
12
What is implied? He heard his wife or his daughter say: "I am a nazirite," and said: "And I am also," he cannot nullify [her vow]17 and they are both nazirites.18 If he said: "I am a nazirite," and she heard and said: "And so am I," he may nullify her vow and his vow is still binding.19 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
יב
כיצד שמע אשתו או בתו אומרין הריני נזירה ואמר ואני אינו יכול להפר ושניהם נזירים אמר הוא הריני נזיר ושמעה היא ואמרה ואני מפר לה ושלו קיים וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
13
When a husband takes a vow and administers an identical vow to his wife, having made a certain decision to administer the vow to her, if she says Amen,20 he may not nullify it. If he took a vow and administered it to her as a question to see what she felt about it, e.g., he asked her "Do you desire to be like me [by taking] this vow or not?" If she says: Amen, he may nullify her vow.
יג
נדר לעצמו והדירה כמותו וגמר בלבו להדירה ואמרה אמן הרי זה אינו יכול להפר ואם נדר והדירה דרך שאלה לידע מה בלבה כמו שאמר לה התרצי בנדר זה להיות כמותי או לא ואמרה אמן הרי זה מפר לה:
14
What is implied? He said: "I am a nazirite and so are you," i.e., you are a nazirite just like me. If she says Amen, he may not nullify her vow.21
If he says: "I am a nazirite. What do you say? Will you be a nazirite like me?" If she says Amen, he may nullify her vow.22 If he nullifies her vow, his vow is also nullified. It is as if he made his vow dependent on her vow.23
If she told him: "I am a nazirite. What about you?", if he answered Amen, he cannot nullify [her vow].24 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
יד
כיצד אמר לה הריני נזיר ואת כלומר ואת נזירה כמותי ואמרה אמן אינו יכול להפר אמר לה הריני נזיר ומה תאמרי האת נזירה כמותי ואמרה אמן הרי זה יפר ואם הפר לה שלו בטל שזה כמי שתלה נדרו בנדרה אמרה לו הריני נזירה ואתה ואמר אמן אינו יכול להפר וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
15
[The following rules apply when] a woman takes a vow and another person extends the scope of the vow to include himself, saying "And I [as well]." If her father or husband hears of the vow and nullifies it, her vow is nullified, but that of the person who extended the vow is not.25
טו
האשה שנדרה ושמע אחר והתפיס עצמו בנדרה ואמר ואני ושמע אביה או בעלה והפר לה שלה מופר וזה שהתפיס עצמו חייב:
16
[The following rules apply concerning] a woman who is unmarried and not in her father's domain who says: "Meat will be forbidden to me after 30 days" and she marries within those 30 days. Even though she is in her husband's domain at the time the vow takes effect, he cannot nullify it. [The rationale is that] at the time the vow was taken she was not in his domain. Concerning such a situation, it was said [Numbers 30:10]: "The vow of a widow or a divorcee... shall remain standing." [This applies] even if she was consecrated to [her husband] at the time she took the vow, for a husband may not nullify26 [vows that were taken] before [the marriage is consummated], as we explained.27
טז
האשה שאין לה בעל ואינה ברשות אב ואמרה הרי הבשר אסור עלי לאחר שלשים יום ונשאת בתוך שלשים יום אף על פי שבשעה שחל הנדר הרי היא ברשות הבעל אינו יכול להפר שבשעת הנדר לא היתה ברשותו ועל זה נאמר ונדר אלמנה וגרושה וגו' ואפילו היתה מאורסת לו בשעת הנדר שאין הבעל מפר בקודמין כמו שבארנו:
17
[The following rules apply if a woman] took a vow while under her husband's domain that meat will become forbidden to her after 30 days or that she will become a nazirite after 30 days and her husband nullified her vow, but he died or divorced her within those 30 days. Although she will be a divorcee or a widow when the vow will take effect, she is not bound by it, because [her husband] already nullified this vow for her.28
יז
נדרה תחת בעלה שיהיה הבשר אסור עליה לאחר שלשים יום או שתהיה נזירה לאחר שלשים יום והפר לה בעלה ומת או גירשה בתוך שלשים יום אע"פשבשעה שהיה לנדר לחול הרי היא גרושה או אלמנה הרי זו מותרת שכבר הפר לה נדר זה:
18
When a widow or a divorcee says: "Wine will be forbidden to me when I marry," [if] she marries, her husband cannot nullify the vow.29 [If a married woman says]: "I will be forbidden [to eat] meat when I am divorced," her husband may nullify the vow. When she is divorced, she is permitted [to eat meat].30
יח
אלמנה או גרושה שאמרה הריני אסורה ביין כשאנשא ונשאת אין הבעל יכול להפר אמרה והיא תחת בעלה הריני אסורה בבשר כשאתגרש הרי הבעל מפר וכשתתגרש תהיה מותרת:
19
When a husband upholds [his wife's vow] in his heart, it has been upheld.31 If he nullifies it in his heart, it is not nullified, as we explained.32 Therefore, if he nullifies it in his heart, he can still retract and uphold it. If, by contrast, he upheld it within his heart, he cannot retract and nullify unless he retracts immediately thereafter.33 [That leniency is granted] so that his thoughts within his heart should not have greater power than the statements he makes.34
יט
המקיים בלבו הרי זה קיים והמפר בלבו אינו מופר כמו שבארנו לפיכך אם הפר בלבו הרי זה יכול לחזור ולקיים ואם קיים בלבו אינו יכול לחזור ולהפר אלא אם חזר בתוך כדי דבור כדי שלא יהיו כח דברים שבלבו גדול מכח המוציא בשפתיו:
20
When a person upholds the vows of his daughter or his wife and then changes his mind, he may appeal to a sage to absolve him of his acceptance [of the vow].35 He may then recant and nullify it for her that day.36 If, by contrast, he nullifies it for her and then changes his mind, he cannot appeal to a sage to absolve it so that he can retract and maintain it.37
כ
המקיים נדרי בתו או אשתו וניחם הרי זה נשאל לחכם ומתיר לו הקמתו וחוזר ומפר לה בו ביום אבל אם הפר לה וניחם אינו יכול להשאל לחכם כדי שיחזור ויקיים:
21
When a consecrated maiden takes a vow and only one of her father or husband upholds her vow, while the other nullifies, even if the one who upheld the vow approaches a sage and has his acceptance absolved, he cannot recant and nullify the vow38 together with the one who has already nullified it. [The rationale is that] the two may only nullify [the vow] together.39
כא
נערה מאורסה שנדרה וקיים לה אביה לבדו או בעלה לבדו והפר לה האחר אע"פ שנשאל לחכם והתיר לו הקמתו אינו חוזר ומפר לה עם האחר שכבר הפר לה שאין להם להפר אלא שניהם כאחד:
22
If a man tells his daughter or his wife: "It is upheld for you. It is upheld for you," [even] if he asks to have the first acceptance absolved, the second one takes effect.40
If he tells her: "It is upheld for you. It is nullified for you, but the acceptance will not take effect until after the nullification does," [the vow] is nullified, because the acceptance does not take effect after the nullification.41
If, however, he tells her: "It is upheld for you and nullified for you at the same time,"42 it is upheld.43 If he tells her: "It is upheld for you today," it is upheld forever.44 If he tells her: "It is nullified for you tomorrow," it is not nullified, for he upheld it today and he cannot nullify it on the following day.45If he tells her: "It is upheld for you for one hour," and the day passed without him nullifying it, he has upheld it. We do not say that this is like one who said: "It is nullified for you after an hour," because he never verbally expressed its nullification.46
If he told her: "It is upheld for you for one hour," and after an hour, he told her: "It is nullified for you," there is an unresolved question [as to the ruling].47 Therefore she is forbidden in [the matters] her vow [concerned].48 If, however, she violated her vow, she is not punished by lashes.49
כב
אמר לבתו או לאשתו קיים ליך קיים ליך ונשאל על הקמה הראשונה הרי השניה חלה עליו אמר לה קיים ליך ומופר ליך ולא תחול הקמה אא"כ חלה הפרה הרי זה מופר שאין ההקמה מועיל אחר ההפרה אמר לה קיים ומופר ליך בבת אחת הרי זה קיים אמר לה קיים ליך היום הרי זה קיים לעולם אמר לה מופר ליך למחר אינו מופר שהרי קיימו היום ולמחר אינו יכול להפר אמר לה קיים ליך שעה אחת ועבר היום ולא הפר הרי זה קיים ואין אומרין שזה כמי שאמר לה הרי מופר ליך לאחר שעה שהרי לא הוציא הפרה מפיו אמר לה קיים ליכי שעה אחת וכשעברה השעה אמר לה מופר ליך הרי זה ספק ולפיכך אסורה בנדרה ואם עברה על נדרה אינה לוקה:
23
When a person takes vows in order to establish his character traits and correct his conduct, he is considered eager and praiseworthy. What is implied? If a person was a glutton and he [took a vow] forbidding meat for a year or two, a person was obsessed with wine and he [took a vow] forbidding himself from drinking wine for a prolonged period or he forbade himself from ever becoming intoxicated, a person would continually pursue illicit gain and was overexcited about wealth [took a vow] forbidding [accepting] presents or benefit from people in a particular country, similarly, a person who would be proud of his comely appearance and took a nazirite vow,50 or the like - all of these are paths in the service of God and concerning such vows and the like our Sages said:51 "Vows are a safeguard for restraint."52
כג
מי שנדר נדרים כדי לכונן דעותיו ולתקן מעשיו הרי זה זריז ומשובח כיצד כגון מי שהיה זולל ואסר עליו הבשר שנה או שתים או מי שהיה שוגה ביין ואסר היין על עצמו זמן מרובה או אסר השכרות לעולם וכן מי שהיה רודף שלמונים ונבהל להון ואסר על עצמו המתנות או הניית אנשי מדינה זו וכן מי שהיה מתגאה ביופיו ונדר בנזיר וכיוצא בנדרים אלו כולן דרך עבודה לשם הם ובנדרים אלו וכיוצא בהן אמרו חכמים נדרים סייג לפרישות:
24
Although [taking vows] is an element of the service of God, a person should not take many vows involving prohibitions and should not habituate himself to taking them.53 Instead, he should abstain from those things from which one should abstain without taking a vow.
כד
ואף על פי שהן עבודה (לשם) לא ירבה אדם בנדרי איסור ולא ירגיל עצמו בהם אלא יפרוש מדברים שראוי לפרוש מהן בלא נדר:
25
Our Sages stated:54 "Anyone who takes a vow is considered as having built a private altar."55 If he transgressed and took a vow, it is a mitzvah to ask [a sage] to absolve it,56 so that he will not have an obstacle before him.
When does the above apply? With regard to vows involving prohibitions. With regard to vows involving the consecration of articles, it is a mitzvah to uphold them and not to ask for their absolution unless one is [financially] pressed, as [Psalms 116:14] states: "I will fulfill my vows to God."
כה
אמרו חכמים כל הנודר כאילו בנה במה ואם עבר ונדר מצוה להשאל על נדרו כדי שלא יהא מכשול לפניו בד"א בנדרי איסר אבל נדרי הקדש מצוה לקיימן ולא ישאל עליהן אלא מדוחק שנאמר נדרי לה' אשלם:
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
סליקו להו הלכות נדרים בס"ד:
FOOTNOTES
1.
See Chapter 12, Halachah 18, which explains that even if the woman intended to transgress, if her father or husband nullified the vow beforehand, she is not liable.
2.
Although the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 234:37) mentions the Rambam's view, it also mentions that of Rabbenu Asher who maintains that this last phrase is not effective in nullifying a vow.
3.
For his wording does not imply that the vow is nullified.
4.
I.e., although these expressions are effective for a sage when absolving a vow, they are not effective for a husband or a father.
5.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Nedarim 13:8), the Rambam explains the statements he makes here. The term "nullify" implies nullifying an entity to the extent that it is as if it never existed. "Releasing," by contrast, implies that a connection existed, but it was released and will not have any effect in the future.
The Rambam's statements have aroused the attention of the commentaries for they appear to run contrary to the understandings of other authorities and the Rambam's own rulings. To explain: From Halachah 15 of this chapter and from Chapter 12, Halachah 19, it appears that until a father or a husband nullifies a vow, the vow is binding. Even when he nullifies it, the nullification affects only the future. See Hilchot Nazirut 9:11. When a sage absolves a vow, by contrast, it is as if the vow was never taken. See Hilchot Ishut 7:8-9, Hilchot Nazirut 3:10.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that the terminology employed by the Rambam here can be explained as follows: A sage does not "uproot" a vow, he causes it to be considered as if a vow not taken originally. A father or a husband, by contrast, uproot a vow, causing an entity that did exist to be nullified.
6.
I.e., the Rambam is making a distinction between hafarah, "nullification," and bittul, voiding as he proceeds to explain. See also his Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit.,, where he elaborates on the distinction between these two activities.
7.
E.g., if she took a vow not to drink wine, he causes her to drink wine.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam, maintaining that there is no concept of voiding a woman's vow by causing her to break it. Such concepts apply only with regard to servants. The Radbaz explains the Rambam's wording, stating that with regard to servants, it is necessary to actually compel them to break their vows. Such conduct is not appropriate with regard to one's wife or daughter. Nevertheless, if a husband or a father gently cause a woman to break their vow, that vow is nullified. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 234:39) mentions both views though it appears to favor the Ra'avad's view.
8.
I.e., since the vow has been nullified, she is under no obligation to keep it. On the other hand, she is not obligated to perform the act forbidden by the vow..
9.
Without him saying anything.
10.
I.e., she took a vow not to wear jewelry or not to partake of a particular food.
11.
Even though the vow has no connection to the Sabbath and it is forbidden to perform any activity for the weekdays on the Sabbath, we allow him to nullify it. The rationale is that, otherwise, he will not be able to nullify it on Saturday night, because the time for nullification will have already passed. As stated in Hilchot Sh'vuot 6:6, on the Sabbath, a sage may absolve only those vows that concern the Sabbath (Kessef Mishneh).
12.
Because it is the Sabbath, it is preferable to change the wording one uses. Even if one uses this wording during the week, the vow is nullified, as indicated by Halachah 6.
13.
This concept is also derived from the prooftext cited below. Until a vow comes into existence and can be upheld, it cannot be nullified (Turei Zahav 234:28).
14.
See Chapter 4, Halachah 11, Chapter 8, Halachah 6. The rationale is that a sage nullifies the vow from the outset, causing it to be considered as if it were never taken. Therefore the entire vow is considered as a single entity. A husband, by contrast, nullifies a vow as it exists. Hence, each element of the vow can be considered independently.
The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 234:36). The Tur and the Rama differ and maintain that a husband must also nullify the entire vow. Once a portion of a vow is upheld, the vow cannot be nullified.
15.
See Chapter 3, Halachah 3, for an explanation regarding the convention of extending a vow.
16.
For by attaching himself to her vow, he shows that he considers it a viable entity.
17.
As Nedarim 3a states, the laws that apply to the nullification of other vows also apply to the nullification of nazirite vows.
18.
For the reason mentioned in the previous halachah.
19.
For his vow is not at all dependent on hers.
20.
She must, however, state her consent, for he cannot compel her to take a vow against her will. See Chapter 2, Halachah 1.
21.
He is forbidden to nullify his wife's vow, because by doing so, his own vow would be nullified as stated in the conclusion of the halachah. Since he is forbidden to cause his own vow to be nullified, he is forbidden to nullify her vow (see Nazir 22b).
22.
For his commitment is not dependent on hers at all. Even if she refuses to accept a nazirite vow, he is obligated to keep his vow. Hence, his right to nullify her vow is intact.
23.
This refers to the first clause. It is as if he made his vow and her vow a single statement. Thus nullifying her vow would cause his vow also to be nullified. This is forbidden, because he is bound to uphold his vow. Nevertheless, after the fact, if he does nullify her vow, his vow is also nullified (Radbaz). See the Nekudot HaKessef [to Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 234:54)] who explains that the Rambam's version of Nazir 22b follows the Jerusalem Talmud and differs from the standard text of the Babylonian Talmud.
24.
As stated in Halachah 11.
25.
The rationale for this ruling is that the husband's nullification affects the vow only from the time he made it onward. It does not nullify it from the outset. Hence, any extension of a vow that was made before the vow is nullified is binding [Radbaz; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 234:51)].
26.
I.e., alone, without the nullification of the father (Chapter 11, Halachah 10).
27.
Chapter 11, Halachot 20, 22.
28.
I.e., whether or not his nullification takes effect depends on their relationship at the time he nullifies the vow (Nedarim 89a).
29.
Because he cannot nullify the vows that were taken before marriage, as explained above.
30.
Here also, what is important is the woman's status at the time of the vow and not what her status will be when the vow takes effect.
31.
As stated in Chapter 12, Halachah 18, when a husband remains silent throughout the day, his wife's vow is upheld. This is a sign that his tacit acceptance of a vow is sufficient for it to be binding (Rabbenu Nissim).
32.
As stated in Halachah 7, he must make a verbal statement of nullification. If, however, he voids his wife's vow, her nullification is not binding, as stated in Halachot 4-5.
33.
This term has a specific halachic definition: the time it takes a student to tell his teacher: Shalom Elecha Rabbi (Hilchot Sh'vuot 2:17).
34.
Since a person can nullify a vow or an oath if he retracts within this time, he may certainly retract his acceptance of his wife's oath in thought.
35.
I.e., just as he can appeal to a sage to absolve him of a vow he took, so, too, he may absolve his acceptance of a vow.
36.
I.e., the day he changed his mind, even if it is several days afterwards, is equivalent to the day he heard of his wife's vow. Since he cannot have his acceptance nullified unless he changes his mind, the days when he does not change his mind are considered equivalent to days when he does not know of the vow [Tur (Yoreh De'ah 234)].
There are other Rishonim who maintain that he can ask the sage to have his acceptance absolved only on the day he heard of the vow. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 234:49) mentions both vows without indicating which one should be favored. The Rama maintains that we should be stringent and follow the second view.
37.
Upholding a vow is considered equivalent to taking a vow. Hence, just as a vow can be absolved, the acceptance of one can be absolved. The nullification of a vow, by contrast, cannot be considered as a vow and cannot be absolved. The Radbaz adds that if the person does not know that he can have his acceptance absolved, the day he finds out that information is equivalent to the day he heard of the vow.
38.
The Siftei Cohen 234:16 states that this applies even if he has the acceptance absolved on the day he hears of the vow.
39.
Even if the first one nullified the vow again so that they make a combined statement, their nullification is not accepted.
40.
At the time he stated his acceptance of the vow a second time, his acceptance was of no consequence, because it was unnecessary. Nevertheless, after he nullifies his first acceptance, the second acceptance becomes significant.
41.
As stated in Halachah 20.
42.
The Radbaz states that this ruling applies even if he does not add the words "at the same time."
43.
The two statements cancel each other out. It is as if he remained silent and the vow is therefore upheld. The Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam's rationale is that since the nullification cannot take effect after the vow is upheld, it cannot take effect if it is made simultaneously with the upholding of the vow.
44.
Since, as the Rambam states later on, he did not verbally express his nullification of the vow, it remains binding even after the day passes.
45.
For a vow must be nullified on the day, the man heard about it. In his Nekudot HaKessef, the Siftei Cohen explains that the Rambam's wording implies that he may nullify it that day. The Turei Zahav 234:39-40, however, infers that he cannot nullify it at all once it takes effect for that day.
46.
The instances cited by the Rambam are questions posed by Nedarim 69b, 70a. Since the Talmud continues asking questions, using one instance as a springboard for another, following the pattern of im timtzeh lomar, the Rambam concludes that each of the instances used as a basis for a further question is accepted as halachah (Kessef Mishneh).
47.
This is the last of the series of instances concerning which the Talmud asks in that passage.
48.
Lest her vow in fact be binding.
49.
Because punishment is not given when we are uncertain whether a prohibition exists.
50.
This requires him to allow his hair to grow untrimmed and thus will prevent him from beautifying his appearance. See Nedarim 9b which relates that Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach would almost never partake of the sacrifices of a nazirite. Once, however, he saw a particularly handsome young man who had taken a nazirite vow. He asked him why he had done so and the young man explained that, because of his good looks, he was being tempted by his evil inclination. To rise above the temptation, he took the nazirite vow. Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach praised him for his actions.
51.
Avot 3:13.
52.
In his commentary to that mishnah, the Rambam explains that "taking and maintaining vows to abstain from certain [undesirable] elements [of conduct] ingrains in a person the tendency to bridle the desires he seeks to curb. This tendency will continue and it will be easy for him to acquire the quality of restraint - i.e., the tendency to protect oneself from impurity." See also Moreh Nevuchim, Vol. III, the conclusion of ch. 48, which discusses the Divine service associated with taking and maintaining vows.
Nevertheless, the Rambam is not praising restraint as a mode of conduct that is always desirable. On the contrary, in Hilchot De'ot 3:1, he explains that a nazirite is called "a sinner" because he abstains from wine and states:
Our Sages directed man to abstain only from those things which the Torah denies him and not to forbid himself permitted things by vows and oaths. Thus our Sages (Jerusalem Talmud, Nedarim 9:1) asked rhetorically: "Are not the things which the Torah has prohibited sufficient for you? [Why] must you add further prohibitions?"
In the instances mentioned here, however, the person taking the vow is not doing so because he thinks that abstinence is desirable. Instead, he wishes to develop self-control and inner discipline and feels that taking a vow is an effective means to encourage him to do so.
53.
Lest he not keep the vow, and in this way transgress.
54.
Nedarim 22a.
55.
During the time the Sanctuary stood at Shilo and from the time the Temple was built in Jerusalem afterwards, it was forbidden to offer sacrifices on private altars. Similarly, taking a vow is considered undesirable and comparable to building such an altar. Rabbenu Nissim explains the comparison based on the passage from Hilchot De'ot cited above, i.e., just as a person who builds a private altar offers a sacrifice to God in an undesirable manner, so, too, a person who takes a vow adds a restriction that the Torah does not require him to observe.
56.
As explained in ch. 4.
Nezirut - Chapter 1
Introduction to Hilchos Nezirut
They contain ten mitzvot: two positive commandments and eight negative commandment. They are:
1. That a nazirite should let his hair grow long;
2. That he should not cut his hair throughout the time of his nazirite vow;
3. That a nazirite should not drink wine, nor a mixture of wine, not even vinegar coming from wine;
4. That he not eat fresh grapes;
5. That he not eat raisins;
6. That he not eat grape seeds;
7. That he not eat grape peels;
8. That he not enter a shelter where a corpse is located;
9. That he not contract impurity because of a corpse;
10. That he shave [his skin] and [bring] his offerings when he completes his nazirite vow or when he becomes impure.
2. That he should not cut his hair throughout the time of his nazirite vow;
3. That a nazirite should not drink wine, nor a mixture of wine, not even vinegar coming from wine;
4. That he not eat fresh grapes;
5. That he not eat raisins;
6. That he not eat grape seeds;
7. That he not eat grape peels;
8. That he not enter a shelter where a corpse is located;
9. That he not contract impurity because of a corpse;
10. That he shave [his skin] and [bring] his offerings when he completes his nazirite vow or when he becomes impure.
These mitzvot are explained in the ensuing chapters.
הלכות נזירות - הקדמה
הלכות נזירות יש בכללן עשר מצות שתי מצות עשה ושמנה מצות לא תעשה וזה הוא פרטן:
(א) שיגדל הנזיר פרע
(ב) שלא יגלח שערו כל ימי נזרו
(ג) שלא ישתה הנזיר יין ולא תערובת יין ואפילו חומץ שלהם
(ד) שלא יאכל ענבים לחים
(ה) שלא יאכל צמוקים
(ו) שלא יאכל חרצנים
(ז) שלא יאכל זגין
(ח) שלא יכנס לאהל המת
(ט) שלא יטמא למתים
(י) שיגלח על הקרבנות כשישלים נזירותו או כשיטמא
(ב) שלא יגלח שערו כל ימי נזרו
(ג) שלא ישתה הנזיר יין ולא תערובת יין ואפילו חומץ שלהם
(ד) שלא יאכל ענבים לחים
(ה) שלא יאכל צמוקים
(ו) שלא יאכל חרצנים
(ז) שלא יאכל זגין
(ח) שלא יכנס לאהל המת
(ט) שלא יטמא למתים
(י) שיגלח על הקרבנות כשישלים נזירותו או כשיטמא
וביאור מצות אלו בפרקים אלו:
1
A nazirite vow is one of the types of vows involving prohibitions,1as [Numbers 6:2] states: "When one will take a nazirite vow...." It is a positive commandment for [a nazirite] to let the hair of his head grow,2 as [ibid.:5] states: "He shall let the mane of the hair of his head grow." If he cuts [his hair] in the midst of the days of his nazirite vow, he violates a negative commandment,3 as [ibid.] states: "A razor shall not pass over his head." Similarly, he is forbidden to contract ritual impurity from a corpse4 or eat those products of a grape vine which the Torah forbids him from eating5throughout the entire span of his nazirite vow.6
א
הנזירות הוא נדר מכלל נדרי איסר שנאמר כי ידור נדר נזיר וגו' ומצות עשה שיגדל שער ראשו שנאמר גדל פרע שער ראשו ואם גילח בימי נזרו עובר בלא תעשה שנאמר תער לא יעבור על ראשו וכן אסור להטמא למתים או לאכול דברים שאסרן הכתוב עליו מגפן היין כל ימי נזרו:
2
When [a nazirite] transgressed and cut his hair, became impure [due to contact with a corpse], or partook of wine grapes, he receives two sets of lashes:7one because of the prohibition "He shall not desecrate his word,"8 and one because of the prohibition that he transgressed from the unique prohibitions that apply to a nazirite.9
ב
עבר וגלח או נטמא או אכל מגפן היין הרי זה לוקה שתים אחת משום לא יחל דברו שכולל כל הנדרים ואחת משום דבר שעבר עליו מדברים שאסורין איסור מיוחד על הנזיר:
3
When a person takes a nazirite vow and fulfills his vow according to the mitzvah, he has performed three positive commandments: a) "He shall act in accordance with all that he uttered with his mouth,"10 and he has acted [accordingly], b) "He shall let the mane of the hair of his head grow," and he has let it grow, and c) shaving and bringing his sacrifices,11 as [ibid.:18] states: "And the nazirite shall shave at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting."
ג
נדר בנזיר וקיים נדרו כמצותו הרי זה עושה שלש מצות עשה האחת ככל היוצא מפיו יעשה והרי עשה והשניה גדל פרע שער ראשו והרי גדל והשלישית תגלחתו עם הבאת קרבנותיו שנאמר וגלח הנזיר פתח אהל מועד וגו':
4
When a person says: "I will not depart from the world until I become a nazirite," he becomes a nazirite immediately, lest he die at that time. If he delays [implementing] his nazirite vow, he transgresses the prohibition:12 "Do not delay in paying it." Lashes are not given for the violation of this prohibition.13
ד
האומר לא אפטר מן העולם עד שאהיה נזיר הרי זה נזיר מיד שמא ימות עתה ואם איחר נזירותו הרי זה עובר בבל תאחר לשלמו ואין לוקין על לאו זה:
5
With regard to a nazirite vow, we do not say: [The vow does not take effect] until he makes a statement that every person would be able to understand [that] in his heart [he desired to take a nazirite vow]. Instead, since he made a decision in his heart to take a nazirite vow and verbally expressed concepts that suggest this intent, he is a nazirite although these concepts are distant and [their simple meaning] does not communicate the concept of a nazirite vow.14
ה
אין אומרין בנזירות עד שיוציא בשפתיו דבר שמשמעו אצל כל העם כענין שבלבו אלא כיון שגמר בלבו והוציא בשפתיו דברים שעניינם שיהיה נזיר אע"פ שהן עניינות רחוקות ואף על פי שאין במשמען לשון נזירות הרי הוא נזיר:
6
What is implied? A nazirite was passing in front of a person and he said: "I will be," he is a nazirite. Since in his heart, he intended to say that he will be like that person, [it is considered as if he made such a statement] even though he did not explicitly say: "I will be like him." Similarly, if he took hold of his hair15 and said: "I will become attractive," "I will grow my hair," "I will cultivate my hair,"16 "I will let my hair grow long," he is a nazirite, provided he made such a decision in his heart.
ו
כיצד הרי שהיה נזיר עובר לפניו ואמר אהיה הרי זה נזיר הואיל ובלבו היה שיהיה כמו זה ואע"פ שלא פירש ואמר אהיה כמו זה וכן אם אחז בשערו ואמר אהיה נאה או אהא מכלכל או אהא מסלסל או שאמר הריני מסלסל או הריני מכלכל או הרי עלי לשלח פרע הרי זה נזיר והוא שיגמור בלבו להזיר:
7
ז
אמר הרי עלי צפרים אף על פי שהיה נזיר עובר לפניו ואע"פ שהיה בלבו להזיר אינו נזיר והרי זה כמי שלא הוציא בשפתיו כלום:
8
All nicknames for a nazirite vow are considered like a nazirite vow.
What is implied? In places where people mispronounce the words they use, if one says: "I am a nazik, a naziach, a paziach,19 he is a nazirite."
ח
כל כנויי נזירות כנזירות כיצד מקומות העלגים שמשנין את הדבור ואמר שם הריני נזיק נזיח פזיח הרי זה נזיר:
9
If a person says: "I am a nazirite only with regard to grape seeds" or "...with regard to grape peels," "I am a nazirite with regard to shaving," or "I am a nazirite only with regard to impurity," he is a nazir in the complete sense and he must keep all the particular laws incumbent on nazirites even though his inten was to forbid himself only with regard to the particular he mentioned. Since the matter concerning which he took the nazirite vow is forbidden to nazirites, he is a nazirite in the full sense of the term.20
ט
האומר הריני נזיר מן החרצנים בלבד או מן הזגים בלבד או הריני נזיר מן התגלחת או הריני נזיר מן הטומאה בלבד הרי זה נזיר גמור וכל דקדוקי נזירות עליו ואף על פי שלא היה בלבו להזיר אלא מדבר זה בלבד הואיל ודבר שנזר ממנו אסור על הנזירים הרי זה נזיר גמור:
10
If, however, one says: "I am a nazirite from dried figs," "...from cakes of dried figs," or the like, he is forbidden [to partake of] the article specified, but he is not a nazirite.21
י
אבל האומר הריני נזיר מן הגרוגרות או מן הדבילה וכיוצא בהן הרי זה אסור בהן ואינו נזיר:
11
When a cup of wine was mixed22 for a person and given to he to drink and he said: "I am a nazirite from it," he is a nazirite in the complete sense.23 If he was a morose person, angry, or in mourning and the others were trying to have him drink to release his burden and he said: "I am a nazirite from this [cup]," he is forbidden to drink only that cup, but he is not a nazirite. [The rationale is that] his intent was only that he would not drink that cup.
יא
מזגו לו כוס של יין ונתנו לו לשתות ואמר הריני נזיר ממנו הרי זה נזיר גמור ואם היה מר נפש או כעוס או מתאבל והיו מבקשין ממנו שישתה כדי לשכח עמלו ואמר הרי זה נזיר ממנו הרי זה אסור באותו הכוס בלבד ואינו נזיר שלא נתכוון זה אלא שלא ישתה כוס זה:
12
Similarly, if a drunken man was given a cup to make him totally inebriated and he said: "I am a nazirite from it," he is forbidden to drink only that cup, but he is not a nazirite. [The rationale is that his intent was] only that they should not have him become overly drunk. If he was as drunk as Lot24 his statements are of no consequence and he is not liable for any transgression that he performs. For when he reaches a state of inebriation equivalent to Lot's, he is not liable at all.25
יב
וכן שכור שנתנו לו כוס כדי לרוותו ואמר הרי זה נזיר ממנו הרי זה אסור באותו הכוס בלבד ואינו חייב בנזירות שלא נתכוון זה אלא שלא ישכרו אותו יותר מדאי ואם הגיע לשכרותו של לוט אין דבריו כלום ואינו חייב על כל עבירה שיעשה שמשהגיע לשכרותו של לוט אינו בן חיוב:
13
When a person says: "I am a nazirite on the condition that I can drink wine," "...become impure because of contact with the dead," or "...cut my hair,"26 he is a nazirite and is forbidden to perform all of the above. [The rationale is that] he made a stipulation against what is written in the Torah and whenever one makes a stipulation against what is written in the Torah, the stipulation is nullified.27
יג
האומר הריני נזיר על מנת שאהיה שותה יין או מטמא למתים או מגלח שערי הרי זה נזיר ואסור בכולם מפני שהתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה וכל המתנה על הכתוב בתורה תנאו בטל:
14
When a person takes a nazirite vow and [afterwards] says: "I did not know that a nazirite was forbidden to partake of wine..., "...to become impure," or "...to cut hair. Had I known this, I would not have take the vow," he is a nazirite and is obligated in all these prohibitions. [The rationale is that] he knows that he is obligated in at least one of these [prohibitions] and as we explained,28 even if one took a [nazirite] vow, forbidding only one of these acts, he is forbidden in all of them.29
יד
נדר בנזיר ואמר לא הייתי יודע שהנזיר אסור ביין או בטומאה או בתגלחת ואילו הייתי יודע כן לא הייתי נודר הרי זה נזיר וחייב בכולם שהרי הוא היה יודע שאסר עצמו באחד משלשת מינין וכבר בארנו שאפילו לא נדר אלא מאחד מהם אסור בכולן:
15
If the person says: "I know that a nazirite is forbidden in all of the above, but I thought that it would be permitted for me to drink wine, because I cannot live without wine," or "[I thought that I would be permitted to become impure,] because I bury the dead," he is not a nazirite,30 because his vow is included in the category of vows made in error31 which need not be absolved by a sage, as we explained.32
טו
אמר יודע הייתי שהנזיר אסור בכל אלו אבל היה בדעתו שמותר לי לשתות אני היין מפני שאיני יכול לחיות בלא יין או מפני שאני קובר את המתים הרי זה אינו נזיר מפני שאלו בכלל נדרי שגגות שאינם צריכין שאלה לחכם כמו שבארנו:
16
When a person says: "My hand is a nazirite" or "My foot is a nazirite," his words are of no consequence. If, however, he says: "My head is a nazirite" or "My liver is a nazirite," he is a nazarite." This is the general principle: Whenever a person designates as a nazirite an organ upon whose removal33 from a living person would cause him to die, he is a nazirite.34
טז
האומר הרי ידי נזירה הרי רגלי נזירה לא אמר כלום הרי ראשי נזיר כבדי נזירה הרי זה נזיר זה הכלל כל אבר שאם ינטל מן החי ימות אם אמר הרי הוא נזיר הרי זה נזיר:
17
When a person says: "I will be a nazirite when a ben is born to me," if a son is born to him, he is a nazirite. If, however, a daughter, a tumtum,35 or an androgynus36 is born to him, he is not a nazirite.37
If he says: "I will be a nazirite when offspring is born to me," even if a daughter, a tumtum, or an androgynus is born to him, he is a nazirite. If his wife miscarries, he is not a nazirite. If she becomes pregnant again and gives birth, he is a nazirite.38
יז
האומר הריני נזיר כשיהיה לי בן אם נולד לו בן זכר הרי זה נזיר אבל אם נולדה לו בת או טומטום או אנדרוגינוס אין זה נזיר אמר הריני נזיר כשיהיה לי ולד אפילו נולד לו בת או טומטום ואנדרוגינוס הרי זה נזיר הפילה אשתו אינו נזיר חזרה ונתעברה וילדה הרי זה נזיר:
FOOTNOTES
1.
Thus it is governed by the laws mentioned in the previous set of halachot. As mentioned in the beginning of Hilchot Nedarim, there are two types of vows: vows involving prohibitions and vows taking on an obligation to bring sacrifices. A nazirite vow also involves bringing sacrifices, as will be explained. Nevertheless, it is considered primarily a vow involving prohibitions (Radbaz).
2.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 92) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 374) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
3.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 209) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 373) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
4.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandments 207-208) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvot 375-376) include two prohibitions involving this matter among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. See Chapter 5 which describes this prohibition.
5.
This includes prohibitions against drinking wine and eating fresh grapes, raisins, grape seeds, and grape peels. Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 202-206) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvot 368-372) include five prohibitions against partaking of these grape products among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
6.
The Radbaz explains that the Rambam does not mention these prohibitions in the order that they are mentioned in the Torah, not in the order that they are mentioned in the Mishnah. The rationale is that the mitzvah of letting one's hair grow is mentioned first because it involves both a positive and a negative commandment.
7.
For with his deed, he has violated two of the Torah's prohibitions.
8.
Which applies with regard to the violation of all vows, as stated in Hilchot Nedarim 1:5.
9.
If he violates his nazirite vow in several ways, e.g., he eats grapes and becomes impure, he receives lashes according to the number of violations involved (Radbaz).
10.
I.e., the commandment to observe the vows one takes. See Hilchot Nedarim 1:4.
11.
Which is done at the fulfillment of one's nazirite vow. Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 93) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 377) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. See Chapter 8 which describes this procedure.
12.
Deuteronomy 23:22. As the Rambam states in Hilchot Arachin VaCharamim 1:1, this prohibition applies to any person who delays keeping the vows and pledges he makes. He does not, however, list this prohibition as one of the 613 mitzvot in these halachot, but instead, in Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot (in the introduction to those halachot and in Chapter 14, Halachah 13).
See also Hilchot Arachin 6:33 which uses this law as support for the principle that a pledge to perform a mitzvah is considered as a vow.
13.
For as stated in Hilchot Sanhedrin 18:2, lashes are not given for the violation of a prohibition that does not involve a deed. Note, however, Chapter 5, Halachah 21.
14.
This concept, which the Rambam illustrates in the following halachot, expresses the principle (see Nedarim 5b) that yadot nedarim, literally "handles of vows," are considered equivalent to vows themselves.
15.
According to the Rambam, when he makes such statements while holding his hair, it is not necessary that a nazirite pass in front of him for his statement to be binding.
16.
The Hebrew uses two expressions to communicate this and the previous concept. Our translations for these terms are taken from Rav Kappach's translation of the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Nazir 1:1).
17.
The offering a nazirite would bring if he became impure (see Numbers 6:10).
18.
I.e., with regard to a nazirite vow. Since it is possible that his statement meant that he intended to offer the doves as a sacrifice, it is not considered as implying a nazirite vow. From the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), it appears that the person is liable to bring these doves as a voluntary offering. It is questionable if here the Rambam is negating that implication.
19.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam writes that gentiles who lived among the Jewish people would mispronounce the word nazir in this manner. As such, there would be some Jews who would make similar mistakes. See parallel concepts in Hilchot Sh'vuot 2:5, Hilchot Nedarim 1:16.
20.
I.e., since he used the term "nazirite" and the object which he mentioned is forbidden to nazirites, the nazirite restrictions all take effect. Note the contrast to the following halachah.
21.
Because the term nazirite does not apply with regard to those objects.
22.
I.e., in the Talmudic era, the wine was very strong. Hence it was customary to mix water into wine before serving it.
23.
I.e., the situation is comparable to those described in Halachah 9.
24.
Who became so drunk that he lost all consciousness of his actions. See Genesis, ch. 19.
25.
I.e., he is considered like a mentally and emotionally incapable person (a shoteh). See Hilchot Ishut 4:18, Hilchot Mechirah 29:18.
26.
I.e., he seeks to avoid keeping one or more of the obligations of the nazirite vow although he will keep the others.
27.
This is a general principle applying in many aspects of Torah law, e.g., Hilchot Ishut 16:9.
28.
In the previous halachah.
29.
The Ra'avad states that if a person would approach a sage and ask him to absolve his nazirite vow on these grounds, the sage would certainly consent. We are speaking about an instance when the person seeks to have the vow nullified without consulting a sage because it was taken in error. The Radbaz states that the Rambam would also accept this ruling. The Kessef Mishneh, however, does not accept this explanation.
30.
He need not observe any of the nazirite prohibitions, even the ones he had intended to observe.
31.
The Ra'avad considers this as a vow which a person is prevented from keeping by forces beyond his control, citing Nazir 11b which appears to support this interpretation. The Kessef Mishneh and the Radbaz state that while the actual wording of the Talmud fits the Ra'avad's interpretation, the Rambam's explanation can be justified. [Significantly, in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Nazir 2:4), the Rambam uses the wording suggested by the Ra'avad.]
32.
Hilchot Sh'vuot 3:6; Hilchot Nedarim 4:1.
33.
The Or Sameach notes that the Rambam changes slightly the wording of his source, Nazir 21b, based on his ruling in Hilchot Shechitah 8:16. There the Rambam writes that if an animal is born without a liver it may live, but if it was born with a liver and then the liver was removed, it is treifah.
34.
For it is considered as if he took the vow upon his entire person. Compare to Hilchot Arachin 2:1; Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 15:2; Hilchot Mechirah 27:8.
35.
A person whose genital area is covered by a piece of flesh and it is impossible to detect his gender.
36.
A person with both male and female sexual organs (Hilchot Ishut 2:24-25).
37.
Although the term ben can be translated as "offspring," its specific meaning is "son." Hence the Rambam rules in this manner.
38.
The fact that his wife miscarried in the interim does not negate the vow.
Nezirut - Chapter 2
1
When a person takes a nazirite vow inadvertently,1 is compelled to take one by forces beyond his control,2 takes one in order to encourage a colleague,3 or takes one while making exaggerated statements,4 he is exempt as is the law concerning other vows.
When a person takes a nazirite vow and regrets having taking it, he may approach a sage and ask him [to absolve it]. He may release his nazirite vow in the same way he releases other vows.5
א
הנודר בנזיר בשוגג או באונס או שנדר לזרז חבירו או דרך הבאי הרי זה פטור בשאר נדרים ומי שנדר בנזיר וניחם על נדרו הרי זה נשאל לחכם ומתיר לו נזירותו כדרך שמתירין שאר הנדרים:
2
[The following rules apply when a person] took a nazirite vow and went to brings his sacrifices for that vow with the intent that he will bring them on the completion of the days of his vow, but discovered that either all of the animals or one of them were stolen. If he took the nazirite vow before the animal was stolen, he is a nazirite.6 If he took the nazirite vow after [an animal] was stolen, lost, or died, he is not a nazirite. It is as if he took a nazirite vow in error.7
ב
מי שנדר בנזיר והלך להביא קרבנותיו שנזר על דעת שיביאם במלאת ימי נזרו מצאן שנגנבו או נגנבה בהמה מהן אם עד שלא נגנבה הבהמה נזר הרי זה נזיר ואם אחר שנגנבה או שאבדה או שמתה נזר אינו נזיר שזה נזר בטעות:
3
ג
המתפיס בנזירות הרי זה נזיר כמו שבארנו בדין כל המתפיס בנדר:
4
If a nazirite was passing before him and he said: "I am like him," he is a nazirite.10 If a colleague of his took a nazirite vow and he said: "My mouth is like his mouth with regard to wine"11 or "My hair is like his hair with regard to cutting it,"12 he is a nazirite. Similarly, if he heard him [take a nazirite vow] and said: "And also I" immediately thereafter,13 [he is a nazirite]. And if a third person said: "And also I" immediately after the second person's statement - even if this continues for 100 individuals14 - they are all nazirites.
ד
היה נזיר עובר לפניו ואמר הריני כזה הרי זה נזיר נדר חבירו בנזיר ואמר הוא פי כפיו מיין או שאמר שערי כשערו מלהגזז הרי זה נזיר וכן אם שמע ואמר ואני בתוך כדי דבור [ושמע שלישי בתוך כדי דבור] של שני ואמר ואני ואפילו הן מאה כולן נזירין:
5
If a person says: "I will be a nazirite when a son will be born to me," and his colleague says: "And also I," his colleague becomes a nazirite immediately.15
ה
האומר הריני נזיר כשיהיה לי בן וחבירו אמר ואני הרי חבירו נזיר מיד:
6
When a person tells a colleague: "I will be a nazirite when a son will be born to you," and his colleague says: "And also I," [his colleague does not become] a nazirite. [The rationale is that] the latter person only had the desire to say that he would love for a son to be born to him to the same degree as the first does. For he is embarrassed in his presence.16
ו
האומר לחבירו הריני נזיר כשיהיה לך בן ושמע חבירו ואמר ואני אין זה נזיר שלא נתכוון זה האחרון אלא לומר שאני אוהב שיהיה לך בן כמו זה שהרי הוא בוש ממנו:
7
When a person says: "I will be a nazirite when a son will be born to so-and so,"17 and his colleague heard his statement and said: "And also I," there is an unresolved question concerning the matter. Perhaps his colleague's intent was to become a nazirite like him18 or perhaps he wanted to say that he loved him like the other person did. When there is a question whether a nazirite vow takes effect, we rule leniently.19
ז
האומר הריני נזיר כשיהיה לפלוני בן ושמע חבירו ואמר אני הרי זה ספק שמא לא נתכוון אלא להיות נזיר כמותו או לומר שאני אוהב אותו כמותך וספק נזירות להקל:
8
[A nazirite vow can take effect in the following situation.] Two people were walking on the road and saw another person approaching them. One of the said: "The person approaching us is Shimon." The other said: "He is Reuven." The first replied: "I will become a nazirite if it is Reuven" and the second responded: "I will become a nazirite if it is Shimon." If he reaches them and he is Reuven, [the first] is a nazirite. If it is Shimon, the second is a nazirite as per the vows. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. If the person did not reach them, but instead turned backward and disappeared from their sight and they did not discover his identity, neither of them are nazirites.20
ח
שנים שהיו מהלכים בדרך וראו אחד בא כנגדן ואמר אחד מן השנים זה ההולך כנגדנו שמעון הוא ואמר חבירו ראובן הוא ואמר זה הריני נזיר אם יהיה ראובן ואמר האחר הריני נזיר אם יהיה שמעון הגיע אליהם והרי הוא ראובן הרי זה נזיר ואם היה שמעון הרי חבירו נזיר כמו שנדרו וכן כל כיוצא בזה לא הגיע אליהם אלא חזר לאחוריו ונעלם מעיניהם ולא ידעו מי הוא אין אחד מהן נזיר:
9
Similarly, when a person says: "I will be a nazirite if there will be 100 kor21 in this grainheap," if when he goes to measure it, he discovers that [some of the produce] was stolen or lost, he is not a nazirite.22 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. [The rationale is that] When there is a question about whether a nazirite vow takes effect, we rule leniently.
ט
וכן האומר הריני נזיר אם יהיה בכרי זה מאה כור והלך למודדו ומצאו שנגנב או שאבד אינו נזיר וכן כל כיוצא בזה שספק נזירות להקל:
10
All [of the people who took nazirite vow in the following situation] are nazirites. Several people] were walking on the road and saw a ko'i23from a distance. One said: "I will be a nazirite if that is a wild beast." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if that is a domesticated animal." Another said:24 "I will be a nazirite if that is not a wild beast." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if that is not a domesticated animal." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if that is neither a wild beast, nor a domesticated animal." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if that is both a wild beast and a domesticated animal." [The rationale is that] in certain matters,25 a ko'i resembles a wild beast. In other matters, it resembles a domesticated animal. In still other matters, it resembles both a wild beast and a domesticated animal and in still other matters, it resembles neither a domesticated animal, nor a wild beast.
Similar laws apply if they saw an androgynus and argued whether the person was a man or a woman and took vows similar to those mentioned with regard to a ko'i. They are all nazirities, because there are matters26 in which an androgynus resembles a man, matters where the resemblance is to a woman, matters in which there is no resemblance to either a man or a woman, and matters in which there is a resemblance to both a man and a woman.
י
היו מהלכין בדרך וראו את הכוי מרחוק ואמר אחד מהם הריני נזיר שזה חיה ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שזה בהמה ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין זה חיה ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין זה בהמה ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין זה לא חיה ולא בהמה ואמר אחד הריני נזיר שזה בהמה וחיה הרי כולם נזירים מפני שהכוי יש בו דרכים שוה בהן לחיה ויש בו דרכים שוה בהן לבהמה ויש בו דרכים שוה לחיה ולבהמה ויש בו דרכים שאינו שוה לא לבהמה ולא לחיה והוא הדין אם ראו אנדרוגינוס ונחלקו בו אם הוא איש או אשה ונדרו על דרך שנדרו אלו בכוי הרי כולם נזירים שהאנדרוגינוס יש בו דרכים שוה בהן לאיש ודרכים שוה בהן לאשה ודרכים שאינו שוה בהן לא לאיש ולא לאשה ודרכים שהן שוין לאיש ולאשה:
11
All of the above applies to the person's status with regard to the mitzvot and not with regard to his nature and physical characteristics. Similarly, the factors involving a ko'i apply with regard to the mitzvot and not with regard to its nature and physical characteristics.
What is implied? [When] a ko'i [is slaughtered, its] blood must be covered as the blood of a wild beast must.27 Its fat is forbidden as is the fat of a domesticated animal.28 It is considered a union of mixed species if it is mated with either a domesticated animal or a wild beast,29 as if it were neither a wild beast or a domesticated animal. And it must be ritually slaughtered as is required for both a domesticated animal or a wild beast. Similarly, there are other halachic considerations that apply with regard to it and they will all be explained in their appropriate place.30
Similarly, an androgynus becomes impure because of a seminal emission like a man and because of uterine bleeding like a woman.31 He cannot be sold as a Hebrew servant, [differing in this way] from both a man and a woman.32 And a person who kills him is executed like one who kills either a man or a woman. There are also other laws applying to him. Each one will be stated in its place.33
יא
וכל הדרכים האלו בעניני המצות ולא בטבעו ותולדתו וכן דרכי הכוי בעניני המצות לא בטבעו ותולדתו כיצד דמו טעון כיסוי כחיה וחלבו אסור כבהמה והרי הוא כלאים עם הבהמה וכן עם החיה כאילו אינה חיה ולא בהמה וטעון שחיטה כבהמה וחיה ויש בו דרכים אחרים וכל אחד מהן יתבאר במקומו וכן אנדרוגינוס מטמא בלובן כאנשים ומטמא באודם כנשים ואינו נמכר בעבד עברי לא כאנשים ולא כנשים וההורגו נהרג עליו כאנשים וכנשים ויש בו דינים אחרים וכל אחד יכתב במקומו:
12
Similar [laws apply]34 if [several people] saw a group of men approaching them which contained sighted people and blind people. One said: "I will be a nazirite if they are sighted people." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if they are not sighted people." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if they are blind." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if they are not blind." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if among them are sighted people and blind people." Another said: "I will be a nazirite if among them are those who are not sighted people and those who are not blind." Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
יב
וכן אם ראו אנשים באים כנגדם מהם פקחים ומהם סומים ואמר אחד הריני נזיר שאלו פקחין ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין אלו פקחין ואמר אחר הרי אני נזיר שאלו סומין ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין אלו סומין ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאלו פקחין וסומין ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין אלו לא פקחין ולא סומין הרי כולם נזירים וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
13
When a minor reaches the age when his vows are of consequence35and he takes a nazirite vow, he is a nazirite and must bring his sacrifices36 even though he has not manifested signs of physical maturity, as he [must uphold] his other vows.
A father may administer a nazirite vow to his son who is underage even though he has not reached the age when his vows are of consequence. A woman, by contrast, may not administer a nazirite vow to her son.37 This is a concept conveyed by the Oral Tradition. It does not apply with regard to other vows.
יג
קטן שהגיע לעונת נדרים ונדר בנזיר הרי זה נזיר ומביא קרבנותיו ואף על פי שעדיין לא הביא שתי שערות כשאר הנדרים והאיש מדיר את בנו קטן בנזיר אע"פ שלא בא לעונת נדרים ואין האשה מדרת את בנה בנזיר ודבר זה הלכה מפי הקבלה הוא ואינו נוהג בשאר נדרים:
14
What is implied? A father told his son who was a minor: "You are a nazirite"; he said: "My son, so-and-so, is a nazirite;" or he said, [pointing to his son,] "He is a nazirite," and the son remained silent,38 the son is a nazirite. The father must have him conduct himself according to all the particulars of the nazirite laws.39 If [the son] becomes impure, he must bring the sacrifices [associated with the termination] of impurity. When he completes his nazirite vow, he must bring the sacrifices [required when a nazirite vow is completed in] purity.40
יד
כיצד האב שאמר לבנו הקטן הרי אתה נזיר או שאמר בני פלוני נזיר או הרי זה נזיר ושתק הבן הרי זה נזיר וחייב האב לנהוג בו כל דקדוקי נזירות ואם נטמא מביא קרבן טומאה וכשישלים נזירותו מביא קרבן טהרה כשאר הנזירים הגדולים:
15
If the son did not desire this and objected to the matter,41his relatives objected,42 he cut off his hair, or his relatives cut off his hair - thus performing a deed that indicates that either he or his relatives did not desire the nazirite vow,43 he is not a nazirite.44 Until when may his father administer a nazirite vow to him? Until he attains majority,45 and becomes an adult.
טו
לא רצה הבן ומיחה בדבר זה או שמיחו קרוביו או שגלח שערו או שגלחוהו קרוביו שהרי נעשה מעשה שגלה דעתו שלא רצה הוא או קרוביו בנזירות זו הרי זה אינו נזיר ועד מתי יש לו להדירו עד שיגדיל ויעשה איש:
16
The concept of a nazirite vow does not apply to gentiles, for [Numbers 6:2]46 "Speak to the children of Israel."
טז
העכו"ם אין להן נזירות שנאמר דבר אל בני ישראל:
17
The concept of a nazirite vow does apply to women and servants.47A father or a husband may nullify a nazirite vow taken by a woman if he so desires as is the case with regard to other vows.48 With regard to a servant, [to nullify his nazirite vow,]49his master must compel him to drink [wine] or become impure due to contact with the dead. If he does not compel him,50 he must observe the nazirite vow.
יז
נשים ועבדים יש להן נזירות והאב או הבעל מפר נזירות האשה אם רצה כשאר הנדרים אבל העבד יש לרבו לכוף אותו לשתות ולהטמא למתים ואם לא כפה אותו נוהג נזירות:
18
When a servant takes other vows that involve personal aggravation or that prevent his performance of work or makes a valuation assessment,51 his master does not have to compel him [to act against the vow to nullify it].52 [The rationale is that the servant] is not the owner of his self and he cannot cause a vow to take effect regarding his person. To what can the matter be compared? To a person who [takes a vow] forbidding produce belonging to another person to the owner of that produce.53
If, however, a vow does not involve personal aggravation and it is not a matter which holds back work, [the master] cannot compel him [not to observe it].54
If a servant took a nazirite vow and his master told him: "It is nullified for you," [when] he receives his freedom,55 he is obligated to complete his nazirite vow.56 [The rationale is that] a servant must be compelled to nullify his vow. We do not nullify it verbally. If one nullifies it verbally, he is granted his freedom.
יח
נדר העבד שאר נדרים שיש בהן עינוי נפש או שמעכבין את המלאכה או שהעריך אין רבו צריך לכופו מפני שאין נפשו קנויה לו ולא יחול עליו נדר למה הדבר דומה לאוסר פירות אחרים עליהם אבל אם אין שם עינוי ולא דבר שמעכב מלאכה אינו יכול לכופו נדר עבדו בנזירות ואמר לו מופר לך יצא לחירות וחייב להשלים נזירותו שהעבד כופין אותו ואין מפירין לו ואם הפר יצא לחירות:
19
When a servant took a nazirite vow and fled from or abandoned his master,57 he is forbidden to drink wine. [This measure was enacted so that] he would suffer difficulty and return to his master's domain.58
If he took a nazirite vow, completed it, and shaved,59 without his master knowing of this, and afterwards, was granted his freedom, he is considered to have satisfied the requirements of his nazirite vow.60 If, however, he took a nazirite vow, but did not shave, and was granted his freedom, he is not considered to have fulfilled his nazirite vow.61 If he became impure and then was granted his freedom, he must begin reckoning [the days of his nazirite vow] from the time he became impure.62
יט
עבד שנדר בנזירות וברח או שהלך מרבו הרי זה אסור לשתות יין כדי שיצטער ויחזור לרשות רבו נזר והשלים נזירותו וגלח ולא ידעו רבו ואח"כ יצא לחירות הרי זה יצא ידי נדרו אבל אם נדר ולא גלח ויצא לחירות לא יצא ידי נדרו נטמא ואחר כך יצא לחירות מונה משעה שנטמא:
20
Nazirite vows must be observed both while the Temple is standing and while the Temple was not standing. Therefore when a person takes a nazirite vow in the present era, he must observe it forever,63 because we do not have a Temple where he can go and offer his sacrifices at the conclusion of his nazirite vow.
כ
נזירות נוהגת בפני הבית ושלא בפני הבית לפיכך מי שנדר בנזיר בזמן הזה הרי זה נזיר לעולם שאין לנו בית כדי שיביא קרבנותיו במלאת ימי נזרו:
21
A nazirite vow may be observed only in Eretz Yisrael.64When a person takes a nazirite vow in the Diaspora, he is penalized and obligated to ascend to Eretz Yisrael65 and observe his nazirite vow there for as long as he vowed.66 Accordingly, when a person takes a nazirite vow in the Diaspora in the present era, we compel him to ascend to Eretz Yisrael and observe his nazirite vow there67 until he dies or until the Temple is built and he brings his sacrifices there at the conclusion of the span of his vow.
כא
אין הנזירות נוהגת אלא בארץ ישראל ומי שנזר בחוצה לארץ קונסין אותו ומחייבין אותו לעלות לארץ ישראל ולהיות נזיר בארץ ישראל כמנין הימים שנזר לפיכך מי שנדר בזמן הזה בחוצה לארץ כופין אותו לעלות לארץ ישראל ולהיות נוהג שם נזירות עד שימות או עד שיבנה המקדש ויביא קרבנותיו במלאת ימי נזרו:
22
Throughout the entire time he is in the Diaspora, he is forbidden to drink wine, to become impure due to contact with the dead, and to cut his hair.68 He must uphold all of the requirements stemming from a nazirite vow, despite the fact that the days are not counted for him. If he transgressed and drank [wine], cut his hair, or touched a corpse or the like,69 he is liable for lashes.
כב
וכל זמן שהוא בחוצה לארץ הרי זה אסור לשתות יין ולהטמא למתים ולגלח וכל דקדוקי נזירות עליו ואע"פ שאין ימים אלו עולין לו ואם עבר ושתה או גלח או נגע במת וכיוצא בנגיעה לוקה:
FOOTNOTES
1.
E.g., he said: "I will be nazirite if I ate today," and he was under the impression that he had not eaten, but in fact he had eaten (Nedarim 25b). See Hilchot Nedarim 8:3 and Chapter 1, Halachah 15.
2.
I.e., people compelled him to take the nazirite vows. See Hilchot Nedarim 4:1.
3.
He said: "I will be a nazirite if you do not eat at my home." See Hilchot Nedarim 4:3.
4.
He said: "I will be a nazirite if I did not see an army as numerous as the Jewish people when they left Egypt." See Hilchot Nedarim 4:1; Hilchot Sh'vuot 3:5.
5.
See Hilchot Nedarim 4:5.
6.
We do not automatically say: Had he known that the animal would have been stolen he would not have taken the vow. If, however, he asks a sage to absolve the vow on this account, it is absolved. See Hilchot Nedarim 8:5; Hilchot Sh'vuot 6:12.
7.
I.e., his vow was taken on a false assumption, for he believed that he possessed these animals. See Hilchot Nedarim 8:3.
8.
I.e., as illustrated in the following halachah, he states that a nazirite vow taken by a colleague should also apply to him.
9.
Hilchot Nedarim 3:3.
10.
See Chapter 1, Halachah 5.
11.
I.e., "just as he is forbidden to drink wine, so am I."
12.
I.e., "just as he is forbidden to cut his hair, so am I."
13.
This term refers to a specific span of time, the time it takes to say: Shalom Elecha Rebbi (Hilchot Sh'vuot 2:17).
14.
I.e., each one speaking immediately thereafter his colleague.
15.
In contrast to the person who took the vow who does not become a nazirite until the child is born (Chapter 1, Halachah 17). This is the conclusion the Rambam derives from the discussion of the issue in Nazir 13a. The Ra'avad offers a different interpretation of the passage. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh justify the Rambam's understanding.
16.
I.e., were he not to make such a statement, it would appear that he does not have genuine love for him. Because of the above, we say that his vow was not made sincerely and he never intended to become a nazirite.
17.
In contrast to the situation described in the previous halachah, in this instance, the person mentioned in the nazirite vow was not present when the vow was taken.
18.
Since the person was not present, we feel that it is less likely that his statements were made merely to make an impression (see Nazir 13a).
19.
The rationale is that at the time of the completion of the vow, the person is required to offer sacrifices. Were his vow not to have taken effect, he would be slaughtering non-sacrificial animals in the Temple courtyard which is forbidden (Rabbenu Nissim).
20.
Because as stated at the conclusion of the previous halachah, if there is a doubt where a nazirite vow is binding, we rule leniently.
21.
A dry measure used in the Talmudic period equivalent to 30 se'ah (Hilchot Arachin 4:4).
22.
For he desired the nazirite vow to take effect only if there was the said amount of grain in the grain heap.
23.
A ko'i is a hybrid born from breeding a deer and a goat. There is an unresolved question among our Sages if it is considered as a domesticated animal (behemah) or a wild beast {(chayah) the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, Bikkurim 2:8}. In Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 1:13, he states that the term refers to any hybrid that comes from mating a domesticated animal with a wild beast.
24.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Nazir 5:6), the Rambam states that if one person made all these statements, he is obligated to fulfill an equivalent number of nazirite vows.
25.
See the following halachah where the Rambam elaborates on these points.
26.
See the following halachah where the Rambam elaborates on these points.
27.
See Hilchot Shechitah 14:4.
28.
See Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 1:13.
29.
See Hilchot Kilayim 9:5.
30.
See Hilchot Shechitah 12:8-9; Hilchot Bikkurim 9:5; 10:7; Hilchot Sha'ar Avot HaTumah 1:6, et al.
31.
I.e., either semen or the secretion of a zav. See Hilchot Mita'amei Mishkav UMoshav 1:7; Hilchot Mechusarei Kapparah 3:7.
32.
See Hilchot Avadim 4:1.
33.
See Hilchot Tzitzit 3:9; Hilchot Yibbum VeChalitzah 6:8; Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 22:11, et al.
34.
Note the Radbaz who offers an explanation why all three illustrations of the principle are necessary.
35.
I.e., twelve for a male and eleven for a female. He or she must also be aware of the One for whose sake they are taking vows (Hilchot Nedarim 11:1-4).
36.
The Ra'avad questions this ruling, noting that there are authorities who maintain that the obligation for a minor to keep his vow is Rabbinic in origin. According to their view, it would be forbidden for the minor to bring a sacrifice, for that would be bringing non-sacramental animals as offerings. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh maintain that those authorities follow a minority position.
37.
The commentaries discuss this issue, noting that seemingly, the prophetess Chanah administered a nazirite vow to her son Samuel. They explain that although the inspiration for the vow came from Chanah, it was actually administered by Elkanah, Samuel's father.
38.
I.e., his silence is considered as acceptance. If, however, he refuses to become a nazirite, he is not bound by his father's statements, as stated in the following halachah.
39.
See Chapter 6, Halachot 3, 11.
40.
See Chapter 8, Halachah 1.
41.
The Kessef Mishneh and the Radbaz refer to the difference of opinion between Rashi and Tosafot (Nazir 28b) whether the objection must be made immediately or whether they can be made throughout the span of the nazirite vow. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Nazir 4:6), the Rambam espouses the view shared by Tosafot that once the son began observing the nazirite vow, he cannot object to it.
42.
The Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 368) writes that if the child agrees to observe the nazirite vow, it is binding even if the relatives object.
43.
See the Or Sameach who debates whether drinking wine is also considered a deed which registers the son's objections.
44.
For his father's authority over him is not absolute.
45.
Becomes thirteen years old and manifests signs of physical maturity (Hilchot Ishut 2:2; see the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit.).
46.
The verse which introduces the laws of a nazirite vow. By addressing the passage to Jews, the Torah indicates that it does not apply to gentiles.
47.
Numbers 6:2 specifically mentions a woman taking a nazirite vow. With regard to servants, Nazir 62b explains how this concept can be explained by Biblical exegesis.
48.
See Hilchot Nedarim, chs. 11-13.
49.
We are speaking about a Canaanite servant who is his master's property. Accordingly, vows he takes are dependent on his master's consent as indicated by the following halachah.
50.
I.e., with regard to a servant, a verbal nullification of the nazirite vow is not sufficient. The master must physically compel him not to observe it.
51.
See Hilchot Arachin 1:2.
52.
I.e., as the Rambam continues to explain, the vow is void without the master having to take any action at all.
53.
According to the Rambam (based on Nazir 62b) , there are four different rulings with regard to vows or oaths a servant takes:
a) All oaths and valuation assessments that a servant takes are nullified automatically. The rationale is that "his body is not his property so that the oath he takes will be effective. With regard to oaths, [Numbers 30:3] states: 'forbid something upon one's soul.' [Implied is that the verse applies to] someone whose soul is his property. It excludes a servant who is someone else's property" (Hilchot Sh'vuot 12:6).
b) Vows other than a nazirite vow that are either aggravating or prevent the servant from working are automatically nullified. The rationale is that, with regard to an oath, Leviticus 5:4 states: "Whether he will do harm or do good." Implied is that he can take an oath - or a vow, because an association is established between vows and oaths - only when he has the choice of either doing good or doing harm to himself. This does not apply to these oaths. Since they harm his master, he has no right to take them.
c) Nazirite vows are not automatically nullified, because the association with vows does not apply with regard to them. Nevertheless, since the servant belongs to his master, the master has the right to nullify his vow.
d) Vows other than a nazirite vow that are neither aggravating nor prevent the servant from working must be fulfilled. The rationale is that in contrast to an oath in which the prohibition is incumbent on the servant (the gavra), for a vow, the prohibition falls upon the object (the cheftza). Since there is no harm to the master involved, such vows can take effect.
54.
Since the master does not suffer any loss, there is no reason that the vow should not take effect.
55.
When a master desires to nullify a vow taken by his servant, he must physically compel him to break it, as mentioned above. If he does not do so, but instead, verbally nullifies it, he is indicating that he no longer considers his servant as having that status, but has freed him. See parallels in Hilchot Avadim 8:17.
Based on a different version of Nazir 62b, the Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and does not agree that verbally nullifying a servant's vow is an indication that he must be freed. The commentaries support the Rambam's understanding.
56.
For the verbal nullification made by his master is of no consequence.
57.
Fleeing from his master is not equivalent to attaining his freedom (Radbaz).
58.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, noting that Nazir 9:1 mentions that this issue is the subject of a difference of opinion between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yossi. Generally, in such instances, the halachah follows Rabbi Yossi and yet the Rambam follows Rabbi Meir's view. The Radbaz explains that the fact that Nazir 61a concludes by mentioning Rabbi Meir's view indicates that the halachah follows his opinion. The Kessef Mishneh suggests (- this, however, is not borne out by the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah -) that the Rambam's text of the mishnah read opposite to the standard version. Others support the Rambam's ruling, based on Tosafot who states that the halachah follows Rabbi Meir with regard to his decrees.
59.
I.e., completed the process required of a nazirite at the conclusion of his vow.
60.
We do not say that since the vow was fulfilled without the knowledge of his master, its fulfillment is of no consequence. Although his master could have nullified his vow, since in fact he did not do so, it is considered significant (Radbaz).
61.
I.e., he must begin counting the days of his nazirite vow anew as a free man, without counting the days during which he observed as a servant.
The rationale why these days are not counted is that since he did not complete his vow (by shaving), the status of the vow is left open. For at any time, his master could compel him to drink wine and nullify his vow. As such, he is never considered to have completed a valid nazirite vow. Although the Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, the commentaries justify his approach.
62.
I.e., he does not bring a sacrifice as would a free man who became impure in the midst of his nazirite vow. Instead, he begins his nazirite vow anew when he becomes pure after he attains his freedom.
63.
See Chapter 3, Halachah 12, for a description of how this vow is observed.
64.
This is not a point of Scriptural Law. Instead, the rationale is that since our Sages decreed that the Diaspora - its earth and even its air - conveys ritual impurity, a nazirite cannot observe his vow there (Nazir 54a; see Hilchot Tuma'at Meit 11:1).
65.
So that he can observe his nazirite vow in purity.
66.
Nazir 19b, 20a relates that Queen Heleni took a vow that if her son would return safe from a war, she would be a nazarite for seven years. She observed her vow and came to the Temple to offer her sacrifices. The School of Hillel ruled that she should remain in Eretz Yisrael and observe her vow for another seven years, for the time she observed it in the Diaspora was not counted.
67.
The Ra'avad questions what purpose will be served by ascending to Eretz Yisrael in the present era. We are all impure because of contact with a human corpse (or impurity that results from that) and there are no ashes from the red heifer to purify ourselves. If so, what difference is there between Eretz Yisrael and the Diaspora? In neither place, will one be able to complete his nazirite vow in purity. Hence, the Ra'avad concludes, it is forbidden to take a nazirite vow in the present age, whether in the Diaspora or in Eretz Yisrael.
The Radbaz states that although we are ritually impure, abiding in the Diaspora increases that impurity. Hence, it is preferable for one who takes a nazirite vow to ascend to Eretz Yisrael. The Kessef Mishneh goes further and states that since a person can prevent himself from coming into contact with the ritual impurity associated with a corpse, there is no prohibition against taking a nazirite vow in the present age.
68.
See the parallel in Chapter 6, Halachah 7, for parallels.
69.
For even though we are all ritually impure at present, a nazirite who is impure who comes in contact with a corpse is liable for lashes for each time he comes in contact (Chapter 5, Halachah 17).
• Sunday, 16 Shevat, 5777 · 12 February 2017
• "Today's Day"
• Friday, Sh'vat 16, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: B'shalach, Shishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 79-82.
Tanya: These "contractions" (p. 89)...to no account whatever.(p.89).
My father said: Coldness and heresy are separated by so slender a barrier! It is said, "For the Eternal your G-d is a consuming fire."1 G-dliness is a flame of fire. Learning Torah and davening must be with a blazing heart, that "all my bones may utter"2 the words of G-d in Torah and prayer.
FOOTNOTES
1.Devarim 4:24.
2.Tehillim 35:10.
• Daily Thought:
Dark Paths of Wisdom
He could have placed streetlamps along all the pathways of wisdom,
but then there would be no journey.
Who would discover the secret passages, the hidden treasures, if all of us took the king’s highway?[Likutei Sichot vol. 16, pg. 365, and in many other talks on the difference between the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds.]
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment