Today in Jewish History:
• Jews of Colmar Expelled (1510) Three years after the request by the Council of Colmar, Emperor Maximilian I granted permission to expel the Jews of Colmar, Germany. The community exerted every effort to secure the repeal of the decree of banishment. With the help of Rabbi Joselman of Rosheim, the leader of the Alsatian Jews, the enforcement of the decree was postponed until S. George's Day of 1512.
• Birth of the "Chafetz Chaim" (1838) Birth of the revered Torah scholar, pietist and Jewish leader Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan (1838-1933) of Radin (Poland), author of Chafetz Chaim (a work on the evils of gossip and slander and the guidelines of proper speech) and Mishnah Berurah (a codification of Torah law).
Link: A Tzaddik's TearDaily Quote:
And the heavenly beasts rush and return, like the flash of lightning.[Ezekiel 1:14]
Today's Study:
• Jews of Colmar Expelled (1510) Three years after the request by the Council of Colmar, Emperor Maximilian I granted permission to expel the Jews of Colmar, Germany. The community exerted every effort to secure the repeal of the decree of banishment. With the help of Rabbi Joselman of Rosheim, the leader of the Alsatian Jews, the enforcement of the decree was postponed until S. George's Day of 1512.
• Birth of the "Chafetz Chaim" (1838) Birth of the revered Torah scholar, pietist and Jewish leader Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan (1838-1933) of Radin (Poland), author of Chafetz Chaim (a work on the evils of gossip and slander and the guidelines of proper speech) and Mishnah Berurah (a codification of Torah law).
Link: A Tzaddik's TearDaily Quote:
And the heavenly beasts rush and return, like the flash of lightning.[Ezekiel 1:14]
Today's Study:
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Beshalach, 3rd Portion Exodus 14:15-14:25 with Rashi
• Exodus Chapter 14
15The Lord said to Moses, Why do you cry out to Me? Speak to the children of Israel and let them travel. טווַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהֹוָה֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה מַה־תִּצְעַ֖ק אֵלָ֑י דַּבֵּ֥ר אֶל־בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל וְיִסָּֽעוּ:
Why do you cry out to Me: [This verse] teaches us that Moses was standing and praying. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “This is no time to pray at length, when Israel is in distress.” Another explanation [of God’s question (Why do you cry out to me?) implies]: “The matter depends on Me and not on you,” as it is said further [in Scripture]: “Concerning My children and the work of My hands do you command Me?” (Isa. 45:11). — [from Mechilta, Exod. Rabbah 21:8] מה תצעק אלי: למדנו שהיה משה עומד ומתפלל, אמר לו הקב"ה לא עת עתה להאריך בתפלה שישראל נתונין בצרה. דבר אחר מה תצעק אלי עלי הדבר תלוי ולא עליך, כמו שנאמר להלן (ישעיה מה יא) על בני ועל פועל ידי תצוני:
Speak to the children of Israel and let them travel: They have nothing to do but to travel, for the sea will not stand in their way. The merit of their forefathers and their own [merit], and the faith they had in Me when they came out [of Egypt] are sufficient to split the sea for them. — [from Mechilta, Exod. Rabbah 21:8] דבר אל בני ישראל ויסעו: אין להם אלא ליסע שאין הים עומד בפניהם, כדאי זכות אבותיהם והם והאמונה שהאמינו בי ויצאו, לקרוע להם הים:
16And you raise your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea and split it, and the children of Israel shall come in the midst of the sea on dry land. טזוְאַתָּ֞ה הָרֵ֣ם אֶת־מַטְּךָ֗ וּנְטֵ֧ה אֶת־יָֽדְךָ֛ עַל־הַיָּ֖ם וּבְקָעֵ֑הוּ וְיָבֹ֧אוּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל בְּת֥וֹךְ הַיָּ֖ם בַּיַּבָּשָֽׁה:
17And I, behold! I shall harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they will come after you, and I will be glorified through Pharaoh, and through all his force, through his chariots, and through his horsemen. יזוַֽאֲנִ֗י הִנְנִ֤י מְחַזֵּק֙ אֶת־לֵ֣ב מִצְרַ֔יִם וְיָבֹ֖אוּ אַֽחֲרֵיהֶ֑ם וְאִכָּֽבְדָ֤ה בְּפַרְעֹה֙ וּבְכָל־חֵיל֔וֹ בְּרִכְבּ֖וֹ וּבְפָֽרָשָֽׁיו:
18And the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I will be glorified through Pharaoh, through his chariots, and through his horsemen יחוְיָֽדְע֥וּ מִצְרַ֖יִם כִּֽי־אֲנִ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה בְּהִכָּֽבְדִ֣י בְּפַרְעֹ֔ה בְּרִכְבּ֖וֹ וּבְפָֽרָשָֽׁיו:
19Then the angel of God, who had been going in front of the Israelite camp, moved and went behind them, and the pillar of cloud moved away from in front of them and stood behind them. יטוַיִּסַּ֞ע מַלְאַ֣ךְ הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים הַֽהֹלֵךְ֙ לִפְנֵי֙ מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיֵּ֖לֶךְ מֵאַֽחֲרֵיהֶ֑ם וַיִּסַּ֞ע עַמּ֤וּד הֶֽעָנָן֙ מִפְּנֵיהֶ֔ם וַיַּֽעֲמֹ֖ד מֵאַֽחֲרֵיהֶֽם:
and went behind them: to separate between the Egyptians’ camp and the Israelites’ camp and to catch the arrows and the catapult stones of the Egyptians. Everywhere it says: “the angel of the Lord (ה),” but here [it says]: “the angel of God (אֱלֹהִים).” Everywhere [in Scripture] אֱלֹהִים denotes [God’s attribute of] judgment. This teaches that at that moment, the Israelites were being judged whether to be saved or to perish with the Egyptians. וילך מאחריהם: להבדיל בין מחנה מצרים ובין מחנה ישראל, ולקבל חצים ובליסטראות של מצרים. בכל מקום הוא אומר מלאך ה', וכאן מלאך הא-להים, אין א-להים בכל מקום אלא דין, מלמד שהיו ישראל נתונין בדין באותה שעה אם להנצל אם להאבד עם מצרים:
and the pillar of cloud moved away: When it became dark, and the pillar of cloud delivered the camp to the pillar of fire, the cloud did not go away as it would customarily go away completely in the evening, but it moved away and went behind them [the Israelites] to make it dark for the Egyptians. ויסע עמוד הענן: כשחשיכה והשלים עמוד הענן את המחנה לעמוד האש, לא נסתלק הענן כמו שהיה רגיל להסתלק ערבית לגמרי, אלא נסע והלך לו מאחריהם להחשיך למצרים:
20And he came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel, and there were the cloud and the darkness, and it illuminated the night, and one did not draw near the other all night long. כוַיָּבֹ֞א בֵּ֣ין | מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה מִצְרַ֗יִם וּבֵין֙ מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיְהִ֤י הֶֽעָנָן֙ וְהַח֔שֶׁךְ וַיָּ֖אֶר אֶת־הַלָּ֑יְלָה וְלֹֽא־קָרַ֥ב זֶ֛ה אֶל־זֶ֖ה כָּל־הַלָּֽיְלָה:
And he came between the camp of Egypt: This can be compared to a person walking along the road with his son walking in front of him. [When] bandits came to capture him [the son], he [the father] took him from in front of him and placed him behind him. A wolf came behind him; so he put him [his son] in front of him. [When] bandits came in front of him and wolves behind him, he put him [his son] on his arms and fought them off. Similarly [the prophet depicts the angel protecting Israel when they drew near to the Red Sea], “But I sent to train Ephraim, he took them on his arms” (Hos. 11:3). — [from Mechilta] ויבא בין מחנה מצרים: משל למהלך בדרך ובנו מהלך לפניו. באו לסטים לשבותו, נטלו מלפניו ונתנו לאחריו, באו זאבים מאחריו, נתנו לפניו, באו לסטים לפניו וזאבים מאחריו, נתנו על זרועו ונלחם בהם, כך (הושע יא ג) ואנכי תרגלתי לאפרים קחם על זרועותיו:
and there were the cloud and the darkness: for the Egyptians. ויהי הענן והחשך: למצרים:
and it illuminated: [I.e.,] the pillar of fire [illuminated] the night for the Israelites, and it went before them as it usually went all night long, and the thick darkness [from the cloud] was toward the Egyptians. ויאר: עמוד האש את הלילה לישראל, והולך לפניהם כדרכו ללכת כל הלילה, והחשך של ערפל לצד מצרים:
and one did not draw near the other: [I.e., one] camp to [the other] camp. — [from Mechilta, Jonathan] ולא קרב זה אל זה: מחנה אל מחנה:
21And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the Lord led the sea with the strong east wind all night, and He made the sea into dry land and the waters split. כאוַיֵּ֨ט משֶׁ֣ה אֶת־יָדוֹ֘ עַל־הַיָּם֒ וַיּ֣וֹלֶךְ יְהֹוָ֣ה | אֶת־הַ֠יָּ֠ם בְּר֨וּחַ קָדִ֤ים עַזָּה֙ כָּל־הַלַּ֔יְלָה וַיָּ֥שֶׂם אֶת־הַיָּ֖ם לֶחָֽרָבָ֑ה וַיִּבָּֽקְע֖וּ הַמָּֽיִם:
with the strong east wind: [I.e.,] with the east wind, which is the strongest of the winds. That is the wind with which the Holy One, blessed be He, visits retribution upon the wicked, as it is said [in the following verses]: “With an east wind I will scatter them” (Jer. 18:17); “an east wind shall come, a wind of the Lord” (Hos. 13:15); “the east wind broke you in the heart of the seas” (Ezek. 27:26); “He spoke with His harsh wind on the day of the east wind” (Isa. 27:8). — [from Mechilta] ברוח קדים עזה: ברוח קדים שהיא עזה שברוחות, היא הרוח שהקב"ה נפרע בה מן הרשעים, שנאמר (ירמי' יח יז) ברוח קדים אפיצם, (הושע יג טו) יבא קדים רוח ה', (יחזקאל כז כו) רוח הקדים שברך בלב ימים, (ישעי' כז ח) הגה ברוחו הקשה ביום קדים:
and the waters split: All the water in the world. — [from Mechilta Exod. Rabbah 21:6] ויבקעו המים: כל מים שבעולם:
22Then the children of Israel came into the midst of the sea on dry land, and the waters were to them as a wall from their right and from their left. כבוַיָּבֹ֧אוּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל בְּת֥וֹךְ הַיָּ֖ם בַּיַּבָּשָׁ֑ה וְהַמַּ֤יִם לָהֶם֙ חוֹמָ֔ה מִֽימִינָ֖ם וּמִשְּׂמֹאלָֽם:
23The Egyptians pursued and came after them all Pharaoh s horses, his chariots, and his horsemen, into the midst of the sea. כגוַיִּרְדְּפ֤וּ מִצְרַ֨יִם֙ וַיָּבֹ֣אוּ אַֽחֲרֵיהֶ֔ם כֹּ֚ל ס֣וּס פַּרְעֹ֔ה רִכְבּ֖וֹ וּפָֽרָשָׁ֑יו אֶל־תּ֖וֹךְ הַיָּֽם:
all Pharaoh’s horses: Heb. כֹּל סוּס פַּרְעֹה, lit., in the singular. Now was there only one horse? This informs us that they [the horses] are all considered by the Omnipresent as one horse. — [from Mechilta Shirah 2] כל סוס פרעה: וכי סוס אחד היה אלא מגיד שאין כולם חשובין לפני המקום אלא כסוס אחד:
24It came about in the morning watch that the Lord looked down over the Egyptian camp through a pillar of fire and cloud, and He threw the Egyptian camp into confusion. כדוַֽיְהִי֙ בְּאַשְׁמֹ֣רֶת הַבֹּ֔קֶר וַיַּשְׁקֵ֤ף יְהֹוָה֙ אֶל־מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה מִצְרַ֔יִם בְּעַמּ֥וּד אֵ֖שׁ וְעָנָ֑ן וַיָּ֕הָם אֵ֖ת מַֽחֲנֵ֥ה מִצְרָֽיִם:
It came about in the morning watch: Heb. בְּאַֹשְמֹרֶת. The three parts of the night are called, אַשְׁמוּרוּת, watches (Ber. 3b), and the one [watch] before morning is called אַשְׁמֹרֶתהַבֹּקֶר, the morning watch. I say that because the night is divided into the watches of the songs of the ministering angels, one group after another into three parts, it is called אַשְׁמֹרֶת, watch. This is what Onkelos [means when he] renders מַטְּרַת. באשמרת הבקר: שלשת חלקי הלילה קרויין אשמורות, ואותה שלפני הבקר קורא אשמורת הבקר. ואומר אני לפי שהלילה חלוק למשמרות שיר של מלאכי השרת, כת אחר כת לשלשה חלקים, לכך קרוי אשמורת, וזהו שתרגם אונקלוס במטרת:
looked down: Heb. וַיַּשְׁקֵף, looked, that is to say that He turned toward them to destroy them, and the Targum [Onkelos] renders: וְאִסְךְתְּכֵי. This too is an expression of looking, like “to the field of seers” (Num. 23:14), [which Onkelos renders:] לַחִקַל סָכוּתָא וישקף: ויבט, כלומר פנה אליהם להשחיתם, ותרגומו ואסתכי, אף הוא לשון הבטה, כמו (במדבר כג יד) שדה צופים - חקל סכותא:
through a pillar of fire and cloud: The pillar of cloud descends and makes it [the earth] like mud, and the pillar of fire boils it [the earth], and the hoofs of their horses slip. — [from Mechilta] בעמוד אש וענן: עמוד ענן יורד ועושה אותו כטיט ועמוד אש מרתיחו, וטלפי סוסיהם משתמטות:
and He threw the Egyptian camp into confusion: Heb. וַיָּהָם, an expression of confusion, estordison in Old French. He confused them; He took away their intelligence. We learned in the chapters of Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yose the Galilean [not found in our edition] [that] wherever it says מְהוּמָה [confusion], it means a tumultuous noise. And the “father” of them all, [the best example of the use of מְהוּמָה, is [in the verse:] “and the Lord thundered with a loud noise, etc., on the Philistines and threw them into confusion (וַיְהוּמֵּם)” (I Sam. 7:10). ויהם: לשון מהומה, אישטורדישו"ן בלעז [מבוכה] ערבבם, נטל סגניות שלהם. ושנינו בפרקי רבי אליעזר בנו של רבי יוסי הגלילי כל מקום שנאמר בו מהומה, הרעמת קול הוא, וזה אב לכולן (שמואל א' ז י) וירעם ה' בקול גדול וגו' על פלשתים ויהומם:
25And He removed the wheels of their chariots, and He led them with heaviness, and the Egyptians said, Let me run away from the Israelites because the Lord is fighting for them against the Egyptians כהוַיָּ֗סַר אֵ֚ת אֹפַ֣ן מַרְכְּבֹתָ֔יו וַיְנַֽהֲגֵ֖הוּ בִּכְבֵדֻ֑ת וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מִצְרַ֗יִם אָנ֨וּסָה֙ מִפְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל כִּ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה נִלְחָ֥ם לָהֶ֖ם בְּמִצְרָֽיִם:
And He removed the wheels of their chariots: With the fire the wheels were burned, and the chariots dragged, and those sitting in them were moved to and fro, and their limbs were wrenched apart. — [from an unknown source, similar to Mechilta] ויסר את אפן מרכבתיו: מכח האש נשרפו הגלגלים והמרכבות נגררות, והיושבים בהם נעים ואיבריהן מתפרקין:
and He led them with heaviness: In a manner that was heavy and difficult for them. [This punishment was] in the measure that they [the Egyptians had] measured [to the Israelites], namely “and he made his heart heavy, he and his servants” (Exod. 9:34). Here too, “He led them with heaviness.” -[from an unknown source, similar to Mechilta] וינהגהו בכבדת: בהנהגה שהיא כבדה וקשה להם, במדה שמדדו (שמות ט לד) ויכבד לבו הוא ועבדיו, אף כאן וינהגהו בכבדות:
is fighting for them against the Egyptians: Heb. בְּמִצְרָיִם, [is like] against the Egyptians. Alternatively: בְּמִצְרָיִם [means] in the land of Egypt, for just as these [Egyptians] were being smitten in the sea, so were those remaining in Egypt being smitten. — [from Mechilta] נלחם להם במצרים: במצריים. דבר אחר במצרים, בארץ מצרים, שכשם שאלו לוקים על הים, כך לוקים אותם שנשארו במצרים:
• Daily Tehillim: Chapters 60 - 65
• Chapter 60
This psalm tells of when Joab, David's general, came to Aram Naharayim for war and was asked by the people: "Are you not from the children of Jacob? What of the pact he made with Laban?" Not knowing what to answer, Joab asked the Sanhedrin. The psalm includes David's prayer for success in this war.
1. For the Conductor, on the shushan eidut. A michtam by David, to instruct,
2. when he battled with Aram Naharayim and Aram Tzovah, and Joab returned and smote Edom in the Valley of Salt, twelve thousand [men].
3. O God, You forsook us, You have breached us! You grew furious-restore us!
4. You made the earth quake, You split it apart-heal its fragments, for it totters!
5. You showed Your nation harshness, You gave us benumbing wine to drink.
6. [Now] give those who fear You a banner to raise themselves, for the sake of truth, Selah.
7. That Your beloved ones may be delivered, help with Your right hand and answer me.
8. God said with His Holy [Spirit] that I would exult; I would divide Shechem, and measure out the Valley of Succot.
9. Mine is Gilead, mine is Menasseh, and Ephraim is the stronghold of my head; Judah is my prince.
10. Moab is my washbasin, and upon Edom I will cast my shoe; for me, Philistia will sound a blast [of coronation].
11. Who will bring me into the fortified city? Who will lead me unto Edom?
12. Is it not You, God, Who has [until now] forsaken us, and did not go forth with our legions?
13. Grant us relief from the oppressor; futile is the salvation of man.
14. With God we will do valiantly, and He will trample our oppressors.
Chapter 61
David composed this prayer while fleeing from Saul. The object of all his thoughts and his entreaty is that God grant him long life-not for the sake of pursuing the pleasures of the world, but rather to serve God in awe, all of his days.
1. For the Conductor, on the neginat, by David.
2. Hear my cry, O God, listen to my prayer.
3. From the end of the earth I call to You, when my heart is faint [with trouble]: Lead me upon the rock that surpasses me!
4. For You have been a refuge for me, a tower of strength in the face of the enemy.
5. I will dwell in Your tent forever; I will take refuge in the shelter of Your wings, Selah.
6. For You, God, heard my vows; You granted the inheritance of those who fear Your Name.
7. Add days to the days of the king; may his years equal those of every generation.
8. May he sit always before God; appoint kindness and truth to preserve him.
9. Thus will I sing the praise of Your Name forever, as I fulfill my vows each day.
Chapter 62
David prays for the downfall of his enemies. He also exhorts his generation that their faith should not rest in riches, telling them that the accumulation of wealth is utter futility.
1. For the Conductor, on the yedutun,1 a psalm by David.
2. To God alone does my soul hope; my salvation is from Him.
3. He alone is my rock and salvation, my stronghold; I shall not falter greatly.
4. Until when will you plot disaster for man? May you all be killed-like a leaning wall, a toppled fence.
5. Out of their arrogance alone they scheme to topple me, they favor falsehood; with their mouths they bless, and in their hearts they curse, Selah.
6. To God alone does my soul hope, for my hope is from Him.
7. He alone is my rock and salvation, my stronghold; I shall not falter.
8. My salvation and honor is upon God; the rock of my strength-my refuge is in God.
9. Trust in Him at all times, O nation, pour out your hearts before Him; God is a refuge for us forever.
10. Men are but vanity; people [but] transients. Were they to be raised upon the scale, they would be lighter than vanity.
11. Put not your trust in exploitation, nor place futile hope in robbery. If [corrupt] wealth flourishes, pay it no heed.
12. God spoke one thing, from which I perceived two: That strength belongs to God;
13. and that Yours, my Lord, is kindness. For You repay each man according to his deeds.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument (Metzudot).
Chapter 63
Hiding from Saul, and yearning to approach the place of the Holy Ark like one thirsting for water, David composed this prayer on his behalf and against his enemy.
1. A psalm by David, when he was in the Judean desert.
2. O God, You are my Almighty, I seek You! My soul thirsts for You, my flesh longs for You; [like one] in a desolate and dry land, without water,
3. so [I thirst] to see You in the Sanctuary, to behold Your might and glory.
4. For Your kindness is better than life; my lips shall praise You.
5. Thus will I bless you all my life, in Your Name I will raise my hands [in prayer].
6. As with fat and abundance my soul is sated, when my mouth offers praise with expressions of joy.
7. Indeed, I remember You upon my bed; during the watches of the night I meditate upon You.
8. For You were a help for me; I sing in the shadow of Your wings.
9. My soul cleaved to You; Your right hand supported me.
10. But they seek desolation for my soul; they will enter the depths of the earth.
11. They will drag them by the sword; they will be the portion of foxes.
12. And the king will rejoice in God, and all who swear by Him will take pride, when the mouths of liars are blocked up.
Chapter 64
The masters of homiletics interpret this psalm as alluding to Daniel, who was thrown into the lion's den. With divine inspiration, David foresaw the event and prayed for him. Daniel was a descendant of David, as can be inferred from God's statement to Hezekiah (himself of Davidic lineage), "And from your children, who will issue forth from you, they will take, and they (referring to, amongst others, Daniel) will be ministers in the palace of the king of Babylon."
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. Hear my voice, O God, as I recount [my woes]; preserve my life from the terror of the enemy.
3. Shelter me from the schemes of the wicked, from the conspiracy of evildoers,
4. who have sharpened their tongue like the sword, aimed their arrow-a bitter word-
5. to shoot at the innocent from hidden places; suddenly they shoot at him, they are not afraid.
6. They encourage themselves in an evil thing, they speak of laying traps; they say: "Who will see them?”
7. They sought pretexts; [and when] they completed a diligent search, each man [kept the plot] inside, deep in the heart.
8. But God shot at them; [like] a sudden arrow were their blows.
9. Their own tongues caused them to stumble; all who see them shake their heads [derisively].
10. Then all men feared, and recounted the work of God; they perceived His deed.
11. Let the righteous one rejoice in the Lord and take refuge in Him, and let them take pride-all upright of heart.
Chapter 65
This psalm contains awe-inspiring and glorious praises to God, as well as entreaties and prayers concerning our sins. It declares it impossible to recount God's greatness, for who can recount His mighty acts? Hence, silence is His praise.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David, a song.
2. Silence is praise for You, O God [Who dwells in] Zion; and to You vows will be paid.
3. O Heeder of prayer, to You does all flesh come.
4. Matters of sin overwhelm me; You will pardon our transgressions.
5. Fortunate is [the nation] whom You choose and draw near, to dwell in Your courtyards; may we be sated with the goodness of Your House, with the holiness of Your Sanctuary.
6. Answer us with awesome deeds as befits Your righteousness, O God of our salvation, the security of all [who inhabit] the ends of the earth and distant seas.
7. With His strength He prepares [rain for] the mountains; He is girded with might.
8. He quiets the roar of the seas, the roar of their waves and the tumult of nations.
9. Those who inhabit the ends [of the earth] fear [You] because of Your signs; the emergences of morning and evening cause [man] to sing praise.
10. You remember the earth and water it, you enrich it abundantly [from] God's stream filled with water. You prepare their grain, for so do You prepare it.
11. You saturate its furrows, gratifying its legions; with showers You soften it and bless its growth.
12. You crown the year of Your goodness [with rain], and Your clouds drip abundance.
13. They drip on pastures of wilderness, and the hills gird themselves with joy.
14. The meadows don sheep, and the valleys cloak themselves with grain; they sound blasts, indeed they sing.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 23
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Tuesday, 11 Shevat, 5777 · 7 February 2017
• Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 23
• In the previous chapters the Alter Rebbe explained that from G‑d’s perspective nothing is ever separate from Him. For the Divine “Word” which creates everything is unlike a word spoken by a human being. The latter becomes separated from the speaker, while the former remains always within its source — G‑d. It is only from the subjective viewpoint of the created beings that they are considered as separate, independent entities. They are able to regard themselves as such because they receive the Divine life-force which animates them by way of many tzimtzumim and through the concealment of the Divine “Countenance”, i.e., the concealment of the inner, ultimate aspect of G‑d’s Will.
• Rambam - Tuesday, 11 Shevat, 5777 · 7 February 2017
• Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
• Positive Commandment 7
Swearing in G‑d's Name
"And swear by His Name"—Deuteronomy 10:20.
When necessary to conclusively confirm or deny, we are commanded to swear solely in G‑d's Name. This constitutes an honor for, and exaltation of, G‑d.
It is forbidden to swear in the name of any other entity, such as an angel or constellation, unless the person's intention is only to swear in the name of the one and only Power who created these entities.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Swearing in G‑d's Name
Positive Commandment 7
Translated by Berel Bell
The 7th mitzvah is that we are commanded to swear in G‑d's name whenever necessary — whether to insure something be done or to prevent ourselves from doing something. [We are required to swear in His name] because it exalts, glorifies, and magnifies G‑d.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "And swear in His name."
Our Sages said explicitly,2 "The Torah tells us 'swear in His name' and 'do not swear.' " This means that just as one may not make an unnecessary oath, which is a prohibition, one is commanded to make a necessary oath, which is a positive commandment.
Therefore, one may not swear in the name of any other creation, such as angels or stars. An exception is where the subject [i.e. G‑d] is obviously omitted, such as one who swears in "the truth of the sun," but means "the true G‑d of [i.e. Who created] the sun." It is in this manner that our nation swears in the name of Moshe — in order to gain honor through [mentioning] his name. It is as if the person uttered the oath, "in the G‑d of Moshe," or "in the One Who sent Moshe." However, when the person uttering the oath does not have this in mind, and swears in the name of a created being having in mind that this object is so true that he can swear on it, he has transgressed, and has "placed an object on the same level as G‑d." The Oral Tradition3 explains that "one who 'places an object on the same level as G‑d' is uprooted from the world."
This is the intention of the verse, "swear in His name," i.e. keep in mind that He alone is the True Existence that it is proper to swear by. In the first chapter of T'murah4 our Sages say, "what is the source that one may take an oath to fulfill a mitzvah? The verse, 'And swear in His name.' "
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 10:20.
2.Sh'vuos 35b.
3.Sukkah 45b.
4.3b
• Rambam - 1 Chapter: Rotzeach uShmirat Nefesh Rotzeach uShmirat Nefesh - Chapter Thirteen
• Rotzeach uShmirat Nefesh - Chapter Thirteen
• Shvuot - Chapter 10
• Tuesday, 11 Shevat, 5777 · 7 February 2017
• "Today's Day"
• Sunday, Sh'vat 11, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: B'shalach, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 60-65.
Tanya: Ch. 20. It is well known (p. 83)...null and void. (p. 85).
The routine of the day begins with saying modeh ani (Siddur Tehilat HaShem p. 6, "I acknowledge before You, living and eternal King etc..."). This is said before the morning laving of the hands, even while the hands are "impure." The reason is that all the impurites in the world do not defile a Jew's "I acknowledge." He might lack one thing or another, but his modeh ani1 remains intact.
FOOTNOTES
1.See "On the Essence of Chassidus, Kehot.
• Daily Thought:
The Tzaddik
The tzaddik is one with G‑d.
We recognize him because within each of us
is also a tzaddik
who is one with G‑d.
Inside each of us is a spark of Moses.
Chumash: Beshalach, 3rd Portion Exodus 14:15-14:25 with Rashi
• Exodus Chapter 14
15The Lord said to Moses, Why do you cry out to Me? Speak to the children of Israel and let them travel. טווַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהֹוָה֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה מַה־תִּצְעַ֖ק אֵלָ֑י דַּבֵּ֥ר אֶל־בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל וְיִסָּֽעוּ:
Why do you cry out to Me: [This verse] teaches us that Moses was standing and praying. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “This is no time to pray at length, when Israel is in distress.” Another explanation [of God’s question (Why do you cry out to me?) implies]: “The matter depends on Me and not on you,” as it is said further [in Scripture]: “Concerning My children and the work of My hands do you command Me?” (Isa. 45:11). — [from Mechilta, Exod. Rabbah 21:8] מה תצעק אלי: למדנו שהיה משה עומד ומתפלל, אמר לו הקב"ה לא עת עתה להאריך בתפלה שישראל נתונין בצרה. דבר אחר מה תצעק אלי עלי הדבר תלוי ולא עליך, כמו שנאמר להלן (ישעיה מה יא) על בני ועל פועל ידי תצוני:
Speak to the children of Israel and let them travel: They have nothing to do but to travel, for the sea will not stand in their way. The merit of their forefathers and their own [merit], and the faith they had in Me when they came out [of Egypt] are sufficient to split the sea for them. — [from Mechilta, Exod. Rabbah 21:8] דבר אל בני ישראל ויסעו: אין להם אלא ליסע שאין הים עומד בפניהם, כדאי זכות אבותיהם והם והאמונה שהאמינו בי ויצאו, לקרוע להם הים:
16And you raise your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea and split it, and the children of Israel shall come in the midst of the sea on dry land. טזוְאַתָּ֞ה הָרֵ֣ם אֶת־מַטְּךָ֗ וּנְטֵ֧ה אֶת־יָֽדְךָ֛ עַל־הַיָּ֖ם וּבְקָעֵ֑הוּ וְיָבֹ֧אוּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל בְּת֥וֹךְ הַיָּ֖ם בַּיַּבָּשָֽׁה:
17And I, behold! I shall harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they will come after you, and I will be glorified through Pharaoh, and through all his force, through his chariots, and through his horsemen. יזוַֽאֲנִ֗י הִנְנִ֤י מְחַזֵּק֙ אֶת־לֵ֣ב מִצְרַ֔יִם וְיָבֹ֖אוּ אַֽחֲרֵיהֶ֑ם וְאִכָּֽבְדָ֤ה בְּפַרְעֹה֙ וּבְכָל־חֵיל֔וֹ בְּרִכְבּ֖וֹ וּבְפָֽרָשָֽׁיו:
18And the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I will be glorified through Pharaoh, through his chariots, and through his horsemen יחוְיָֽדְע֥וּ מִצְרַ֖יִם כִּֽי־אֲנִ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה בְּהִכָּֽבְדִ֣י בְּפַרְעֹ֔ה בְּרִכְבּ֖וֹ וּבְפָֽרָשָֽׁיו:
19Then the angel of God, who had been going in front of the Israelite camp, moved and went behind them, and the pillar of cloud moved away from in front of them and stood behind them. יטוַיִּסַּ֞ע מַלְאַ֣ךְ הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים הַֽהֹלֵךְ֙ לִפְנֵי֙ מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיֵּ֖לֶךְ מֵאַֽחֲרֵיהֶ֑ם וַיִּסַּ֞ע עַמּ֤וּד הֶֽעָנָן֙ מִפְּנֵיהֶ֔ם וַיַּֽעֲמֹ֖ד מֵאַֽחֲרֵיהֶֽם:
and went behind them: to separate between the Egyptians’ camp and the Israelites’ camp and to catch the arrows and the catapult stones of the Egyptians. Everywhere it says: “the angel of the Lord (ה),” but here [it says]: “the angel of God (אֱלֹהִים).” Everywhere [in Scripture] אֱלֹהִים denotes [God’s attribute of] judgment. This teaches that at that moment, the Israelites were being judged whether to be saved or to perish with the Egyptians. וילך מאחריהם: להבדיל בין מחנה מצרים ובין מחנה ישראל, ולקבל חצים ובליסטראות של מצרים. בכל מקום הוא אומר מלאך ה', וכאן מלאך הא-להים, אין א-להים בכל מקום אלא דין, מלמד שהיו ישראל נתונין בדין באותה שעה אם להנצל אם להאבד עם מצרים:
and the pillar of cloud moved away: When it became dark, and the pillar of cloud delivered the camp to the pillar of fire, the cloud did not go away as it would customarily go away completely in the evening, but it moved away and went behind them [the Israelites] to make it dark for the Egyptians. ויסע עמוד הענן: כשחשיכה והשלים עמוד הענן את המחנה לעמוד האש, לא נסתלק הענן כמו שהיה רגיל להסתלק ערבית לגמרי, אלא נסע והלך לו מאחריהם להחשיך למצרים:
20And he came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel, and there were the cloud and the darkness, and it illuminated the night, and one did not draw near the other all night long. כוַיָּבֹ֞א בֵּ֣ין | מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה מִצְרַ֗יִם וּבֵין֙ מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיְהִ֤י הֶֽעָנָן֙ וְהַח֔שֶׁךְ וַיָּ֖אֶר אֶת־הַלָּ֑יְלָה וְלֹֽא־קָרַ֥ב זֶ֛ה אֶל־זֶ֖ה כָּל־הַלָּֽיְלָה:
And he came between the camp of Egypt: This can be compared to a person walking along the road with his son walking in front of him. [When] bandits came to capture him [the son], he [the father] took him from in front of him and placed him behind him. A wolf came behind him; so he put him [his son] in front of him. [When] bandits came in front of him and wolves behind him, he put him [his son] on his arms and fought them off. Similarly [the prophet depicts the angel protecting Israel when they drew near to the Red Sea], “But I sent to train Ephraim, he took them on his arms” (Hos. 11:3). — [from Mechilta] ויבא בין מחנה מצרים: משל למהלך בדרך ובנו מהלך לפניו. באו לסטים לשבותו, נטלו מלפניו ונתנו לאחריו, באו זאבים מאחריו, נתנו לפניו, באו לסטים לפניו וזאבים מאחריו, נתנו על זרועו ונלחם בהם, כך (הושע יא ג) ואנכי תרגלתי לאפרים קחם על זרועותיו:
and there were the cloud and the darkness: for the Egyptians. ויהי הענן והחשך: למצרים:
and it illuminated: [I.e.,] the pillar of fire [illuminated] the night for the Israelites, and it went before them as it usually went all night long, and the thick darkness [from the cloud] was toward the Egyptians. ויאר: עמוד האש את הלילה לישראל, והולך לפניהם כדרכו ללכת כל הלילה, והחשך של ערפל לצד מצרים:
and one did not draw near the other: [I.e., one] camp to [the other] camp. — [from Mechilta, Jonathan] ולא קרב זה אל זה: מחנה אל מחנה:
21And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the Lord led the sea with the strong east wind all night, and He made the sea into dry land and the waters split. כאוַיֵּ֨ט משֶׁ֣ה אֶת־יָדוֹ֘ עַל־הַיָּם֒ וַיּ֣וֹלֶךְ יְהֹוָ֣ה | אֶת־הַ֠יָּ֠ם בְּר֨וּחַ קָדִ֤ים עַזָּה֙ כָּל־הַלַּ֔יְלָה וַיָּ֥שֶׂם אֶת־הַיָּ֖ם לֶחָֽרָבָ֑ה וַיִּבָּֽקְע֖וּ הַמָּֽיִם:
with the strong east wind: [I.e.,] with the east wind, which is the strongest of the winds. That is the wind with which the Holy One, blessed be He, visits retribution upon the wicked, as it is said [in the following verses]: “With an east wind I will scatter them” (Jer. 18:17); “an east wind shall come, a wind of the Lord” (Hos. 13:15); “the east wind broke you in the heart of the seas” (Ezek. 27:26); “He spoke with His harsh wind on the day of the east wind” (Isa. 27:8). — [from Mechilta] ברוח קדים עזה: ברוח קדים שהיא עזה שברוחות, היא הרוח שהקב"ה נפרע בה מן הרשעים, שנאמר (ירמי' יח יז) ברוח קדים אפיצם, (הושע יג טו) יבא קדים רוח ה', (יחזקאל כז כו) רוח הקדים שברך בלב ימים, (ישעי' כז ח) הגה ברוחו הקשה ביום קדים:
and the waters split: All the water in the world. — [from Mechilta Exod. Rabbah 21:6] ויבקעו המים: כל מים שבעולם:
22Then the children of Israel came into the midst of the sea on dry land, and the waters were to them as a wall from their right and from their left. כבוַיָּבֹ֧אוּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל בְּת֥וֹךְ הַיָּ֖ם בַּיַּבָּשָׁ֑ה וְהַמַּ֤יִם לָהֶם֙ חוֹמָ֔ה מִֽימִינָ֖ם וּמִשְּׂמֹאלָֽם:
23The Egyptians pursued and came after them all Pharaoh s horses, his chariots, and his horsemen, into the midst of the sea. כגוַיִּרְדְּפ֤וּ מִצְרַ֨יִם֙ וַיָּבֹ֣אוּ אַֽחֲרֵיהֶ֔ם כֹּ֚ל ס֣וּס פַּרְעֹ֔ה רִכְבּ֖וֹ וּפָֽרָשָׁ֑יו אֶל־תּ֖וֹךְ הַיָּֽם:
all Pharaoh’s horses: Heb. כֹּל סוּס פַּרְעֹה, lit., in the singular. Now was there only one horse? This informs us that they [the horses] are all considered by the Omnipresent as one horse. — [from Mechilta Shirah 2] כל סוס פרעה: וכי סוס אחד היה אלא מגיד שאין כולם חשובין לפני המקום אלא כסוס אחד:
24It came about in the morning watch that the Lord looked down over the Egyptian camp through a pillar of fire and cloud, and He threw the Egyptian camp into confusion. כדוַֽיְהִי֙ בְּאַשְׁמֹ֣רֶת הַבֹּ֔קֶר וַיַּשְׁקֵ֤ף יְהֹוָה֙ אֶל־מַֽחֲנֵ֣ה מִצְרַ֔יִם בְּעַמּ֥וּד אֵ֖שׁ וְעָנָ֑ן וַיָּ֕הָם אֵ֖ת מַֽחֲנֵ֥ה מִצְרָֽיִם:
It came about in the morning watch: Heb. בְּאַֹשְמֹרֶת. The three parts of the night are called, אַשְׁמוּרוּת, watches (Ber. 3b), and the one [watch] before morning is called אַשְׁמֹרֶתהַבֹּקֶר, the morning watch. I say that because the night is divided into the watches of the songs of the ministering angels, one group after another into three parts, it is called אַשְׁמֹרֶת, watch. This is what Onkelos [means when he] renders מַטְּרַת. באשמרת הבקר: שלשת חלקי הלילה קרויין אשמורות, ואותה שלפני הבקר קורא אשמורת הבקר. ואומר אני לפי שהלילה חלוק למשמרות שיר של מלאכי השרת, כת אחר כת לשלשה חלקים, לכך קרוי אשמורת, וזהו שתרגם אונקלוס במטרת:
looked down: Heb. וַיַּשְׁקֵף, looked, that is to say that He turned toward them to destroy them, and the Targum [Onkelos] renders: וְאִסְךְתְּכֵי. This too is an expression of looking, like “to the field of seers” (Num. 23:14), [which Onkelos renders:] לַחִקַל סָכוּתָא וישקף: ויבט, כלומר פנה אליהם להשחיתם, ותרגומו ואסתכי, אף הוא לשון הבטה, כמו (במדבר כג יד) שדה צופים - חקל סכותא:
through a pillar of fire and cloud: The pillar of cloud descends and makes it [the earth] like mud, and the pillar of fire boils it [the earth], and the hoofs of their horses slip. — [from Mechilta] בעמוד אש וענן: עמוד ענן יורד ועושה אותו כטיט ועמוד אש מרתיחו, וטלפי סוסיהם משתמטות:
and He threw the Egyptian camp into confusion: Heb. וַיָּהָם, an expression of confusion, estordison in Old French. He confused them; He took away their intelligence. We learned in the chapters of Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yose the Galilean [not found in our edition] [that] wherever it says מְהוּמָה [confusion], it means a tumultuous noise. And the “father” of them all, [the best example of the use of מְהוּמָה, is [in the verse:] “and the Lord thundered with a loud noise, etc., on the Philistines and threw them into confusion (וַיְהוּמֵּם)” (I Sam. 7:10). ויהם: לשון מהומה, אישטורדישו"ן בלעז [מבוכה] ערבבם, נטל סגניות שלהם. ושנינו בפרקי רבי אליעזר בנו של רבי יוסי הגלילי כל מקום שנאמר בו מהומה, הרעמת קול הוא, וזה אב לכולן (שמואל א' ז י) וירעם ה' בקול גדול וגו' על פלשתים ויהומם:
25And He removed the wheels of their chariots, and He led them with heaviness, and the Egyptians said, Let me run away from the Israelites because the Lord is fighting for them against the Egyptians כהוַיָּ֗סַר אֵ֚ת אֹפַ֣ן מַרְכְּבֹתָ֔יו וַיְנַֽהֲגֵ֖הוּ בִּכְבֵדֻ֑ת וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מִצְרַ֗יִם אָנ֨וּסָה֙ מִפְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל כִּ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה נִלְחָ֥ם לָהֶ֖ם בְּמִצְרָֽיִם:
And He removed the wheels of their chariots: With the fire the wheels were burned, and the chariots dragged, and those sitting in them were moved to and fro, and their limbs were wrenched apart. — [from an unknown source, similar to Mechilta] ויסר את אפן מרכבתיו: מכח האש נשרפו הגלגלים והמרכבות נגררות, והיושבים בהם נעים ואיבריהן מתפרקין:
and He led them with heaviness: In a manner that was heavy and difficult for them. [This punishment was] in the measure that they [the Egyptians had] measured [to the Israelites], namely “and he made his heart heavy, he and his servants” (Exod. 9:34). Here too, “He led them with heaviness.” -[from an unknown source, similar to Mechilta] וינהגהו בכבדת: בהנהגה שהיא כבדה וקשה להם, במדה שמדדו (שמות ט לד) ויכבד לבו הוא ועבדיו, אף כאן וינהגהו בכבדות:
is fighting for them against the Egyptians: Heb. בְּמִצְרָיִם, [is like] against the Egyptians. Alternatively: בְּמִצְרָיִם [means] in the land of Egypt, for just as these [Egyptians] were being smitten in the sea, so were those remaining in Egypt being smitten. — [from Mechilta] נלחם להם במצרים: במצריים. דבר אחר במצרים, בארץ מצרים, שכשם שאלו לוקים על הים, כך לוקים אותם שנשארו במצרים:
• Daily Tehillim: Chapters 60 - 65
• Chapter 60
This psalm tells of when Joab, David's general, came to Aram Naharayim for war and was asked by the people: "Are you not from the children of Jacob? What of the pact he made with Laban?" Not knowing what to answer, Joab asked the Sanhedrin. The psalm includes David's prayer for success in this war.
1. For the Conductor, on the shushan eidut. A michtam by David, to instruct,
2. when he battled with Aram Naharayim and Aram Tzovah, and Joab returned and smote Edom in the Valley of Salt, twelve thousand [men].
3. O God, You forsook us, You have breached us! You grew furious-restore us!
4. You made the earth quake, You split it apart-heal its fragments, for it totters!
5. You showed Your nation harshness, You gave us benumbing wine to drink.
6. [Now] give those who fear You a banner to raise themselves, for the sake of truth, Selah.
7. That Your beloved ones may be delivered, help with Your right hand and answer me.
8. God said with His Holy [Spirit] that I would exult; I would divide Shechem, and measure out the Valley of Succot.
9. Mine is Gilead, mine is Menasseh, and Ephraim is the stronghold of my head; Judah is my prince.
10. Moab is my washbasin, and upon Edom I will cast my shoe; for me, Philistia will sound a blast [of coronation].
11. Who will bring me into the fortified city? Who will lead me unto Edom?
12. Is it not You, God, Who has [until now] forsaken us, and did not go forth with our legions?
13. Grant us relief from the oppressor; futile is the salvation of man.
14. With God we will do valiantly, and He will trample our oppressors.
Chapter 61
David composed this prayer while fleeing from Saul. The object of all his thoughts and his entreaty is that God grant him long life-not for the sake of pursuing the pleasures of the world, but rather to serve God in awe, all of his days.
1. For the Conductor, on the neginat, by David.
2. Hear my cry, O God, listen to my prayer.
3. From the end of the earth I call to You, when my heart is faint [with trouble]: Lead me upon the rock that surpasses me!
4. For You have been a refuge for me, a tower of strength in the face of the enemy.
5. I will dwell in Your tent forever; I will take refuge in the shelter of Your wings, Selah.
6. For You, God, heard my vows; You granted the inheritance of those who fear Your Name.
7. Add days to the days of the king; may his years equal those of every generation.
8. May he sit always before God; appoint kindness and truth to preserve him.
9. Thus will I sing the praise of Your Name forever, as I fulfill my vows each day.
Chapter 62
David prays for the downfall of his enemies. He also exhorts his generation that their faith should not rest in riches, telling them that the accumulation of wealth is utter futility.
1. For the Conductor, on the yedutun,1 a psalm by David.
2. To God alone does my soul hope; my salvation is from Him.
3. He alone is my rock and salvation, my stronghold; I shall not falter greatly.
4. Until when will you plot disaster for man? May you all be killed-like a leaning wall, a toppled fence.
5. Out of their arrogance alone they scheme to topple me, they favor falsehood; with their mouths they bless, and in their hearts they curse, Selah.
6. To God alone does my soul hope, for my hope is from Him.
7. He alone is my rock and salvation, my stronghold; I shall not falter.
8. My salvation and honor is upon God; the rock of my strength-my refuge is in God.
9. Trust in Him at all times, O nation, pour out your hearts before Him; God is a refuge for us forever.
10. Men are but vanity; people [but] transients. Were they to be raised upon the scale, they would be lighter than vanity.
11. Put not your trust in exploitation, nor place futile hope in robbery. If [corrupt] wealth flourishes, pay it no heed.
12. God spoke one thing, from which I perceived two: That strength belongs to God;
13. and that Yours, my Lord, is kindness. For You repay each man according to his deeds.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument (Metzudot).
Chapter 63
Hiding from Saul, and yearning to approach the place of the Holy Ark like one thirsting for water, David composed this prayer on his behalf and against his enemy.
1. A psalm by David, when he was in the Judean desert.
2. O God, You are my Almighty, I seek You! My soul thirsts for You, my flesh longs for You; [like one] in a desolate and dry land, without water,
3. so [I thirst] to see You in the Sanctuary, to behold Your might and glory.
4. For Your kindness is better than life; my lips shall praise You.
5. Thus will I bless you all my life, in Your Name I will raise my hands [in prayer].
6. As with fat and abundance my soul is sated, when my mouth offers praise with expressions of joy.
7. Indeed, I remember You upon my bed; during the watches of the night I meditate upon You.
8. For You were a help for me; I sing in the shadow of Your wings.
9. My soul cleaved to You; Your right hand supported me.
10. But they seek desolation for my soul; they will enter the depths of the earth.
11. They will drag them by the sword; they will be the portion of foxes.
12. And the king will rejoice in God, and all who swear by Him will take pride, when the mouths of liars are blocked up.
Chapter 64
The masters of homiletics interpret this psalm as alluding to Daniel, who was thrown into the lion's den. With divine inspiration, David foresaw the event and prayed for him. Daniel was a descendant of David, as can be inferred from God's statement to Hezekiah (himself of Davidic lineage), "And from your children, who will issue forth from you, they will take, and they (referring to, amongst others, Daniel) will be ministers in the palace of the king of Babylon."
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. Hear my voice, O God, as I recount [my woes]; preserve my life from the terror of the enemy.
3. Shelter me from the schemes of the wicked, from the conspiracy of evildoers,
4. who have sharpened their tongue like the sword, aimed their arrow-a bitter word-
5. to shoot at the innocent from hidden places; suddenly they shoot at him, they are not afraid.
6. They encourage themselves in an evil thing, they speak of laying traps; they say: "Who will see them?”
7. They sought pretexts; [and when] they completed a diligent search, each man [kept the plot] inside, deep in the heart.
8. But God shot at them; [like] a sudden arrow were their blows.
9. Their own tongues caused them to stumble; all who see them shake their heads [derisively].
10. Then all men feared, and recounted the work of God; they perceived His deed.
11. Let the righteous one rejoice in the Lord and take refuge in Him, and let them take pride-all upright of heart.
Chapter 65
This psalm contains awe-inspiring and glorious praises to God, as well as entreaties and prayers concerning our sins. It declares it impossible to recount God's greatness, for who can recount His mighty acts? Hence, silence is His praise.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David, a song.
2. Silence is praise for You, O God [Who dwells in] Zion; and to You vows will be paid.
3. O Heeder of prayer, to You does all flesh come.
4. Matters of sin overwhelm me; You will pardon our transgressions.
5. Fortunate is [the nation] whom You choose and draw near, to dwell in Your courtyards; may we be sated with the goodness of Your House, with the holiness of Your Sanctuary.
6. Answer us with awesome deeds as befits Your righteousness, O God of our salvation, the security of all [who inhabit] the ends of the earth and distant seas.
7. With His strength He prepares [rain for] the mountains; He is girded with might.
8. He quiets the roar of the seas, the roar of their waves and the tumult of nations.
9. Those who inhabit the ends [of the earth] fear [You] because of Your signs; the emergences of morning and evening cause [man] to sing praise.
10. You remember the earth and water it, you enrich it abundantly [from] God's stream filled with water. You prepare their grain, for so do You prepare it.
11. You saturate its furrows, gratifying its legions; with showers You soften it and bless its growth.
12. You crown the year of Your goodness [with rain], and Your clouds drip abundance.
13. They drip on pastures of wilderness, and the hills gird themselves with joy.
14. The meadows don sheep, and the valleys cloak themselves with grain; they sound blasts, indeed they sing.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 23
• Lessons in Tanya
• Today's Tanya Lesson
• Tuesday, 11 Shevat, 5777 · 7 February 2017
• Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 23
• In the previous chapters the Alter Rebbe explained that from G‑d’s perspective nothing is ever separate from Him. For the Divine “Word” which creates everything is unlike a word spoken by a human being. The latter becomes separated from the speaker, while the former remains always within its source — G‑d. It is only from the subjective viewpoint of the created beings that they are considered as separate, independent entities. They are able to regard themselves as such because they receive the Divine life-force which animates them by way of many tzimtzumim and through the concealment of the Divine “Countenance”, i.e., the concealment of the inner, ultimate aspect of G‑d’s Will.
The logical corollary to this idea is that anything in which the Divine Will stands revealed, is completely nullified before G‑d, and absolutely one with Him. In this chapter the Alter Rebbe applies this idea to the Torah and the mitzvot, in which G‑d’s Will is manifest. He demonstrates how one can unite with G‑d’s Will and wisdom, and thereby with G‑d Himself, through study of the Torah and observance of the mitzvot.
ועם כל הנ״ל יובן ויבואר היטב בתוספת ביאור מה שאמרו בזהר, דאורייתא וקודשא בריך הוא כולא חד
In light of all that has been said above, we can better understand and more fully and clearly elucidate the statement in the Zohar1 that “The Torah and G‑d are entirely one,”
ובתיקונים פירשו דרמ״ח פיקודין אינון רמ״ח אברין דמלכא
and the commentary in the Tikkunei Zohar2 that “The 248 commandments are the 248 ‘organs’ of the [Divine] King.”
Just as every organ in the human body is a repository for the particular faculty of the soul that is vested in that organ (e.g., the eye is the receptacle for the faculty of sight, and the ear for the faculty of hearing), so too is every commandment a channel and a repository for the Divine Will that is vested and expressed in that particular commandment. (The commandments in general represent G‑d’s Will, and each individual mitzvah is an expression of a particular aspect of this Will.)
It should be noted, however, that according to this analogy the mitzvot are no more than G‑d’s “organs”. An organ of the body is not one with the soul. True, when any particular soul-power is vested in its corresponding organ, they function together as one. But they remain two separate entities that have been joined together. By the same token, the mitzvot are not actually one with G‑d: they are merely (as it were) joined to Him. Yet the Torah, whose whole purpose is to explain the mitzvot, is “entirely one with G‑d,” as quoted earlier from the Zohar. What is the meaning of this greater unity with G‑d found in the Torah (and in the act of Torah study), that surpasses even the unity in the mitzvot and in their fulfillment? This the Alter Rebbe now goes on to explain.
לפי שהמצות הן פנימיות רצון העליון וחפצו האמיתי, המלובש בכל העולמות העליונים ותחתונים להחיותם
For the mitzvot constitute G‑d’s innermost Will and His true desire, which is clothed in all the upper and lower worlds, thereby giving them life.
All the worlds are a product of G‑d’s Will. He desired that they exist, and this desire is what brought them into being. However, this desire is but an external manifestation of His underlying, internal Will — the desire for mitzvot. Why, in fact, does G‑d desire that the worlds exist? Because He desires that the mitzvot be performed — and this is possible only when there is someone to perform them, and when there are objects with which to perform them. To this end G‑d created all the worlds.
This can be illustrated by the analogy of a man who travels abroad on business. Naturally, he travels because he wishes to do so. But his “internal” (i.e., ultimate) desire in the journey, his underlying motive, lies in the profit he expects to reap. When we probe still deeper, we find that the desire for profit is itself an external expression of an even more “internal” desire — the desire for the things which he will be able to buy with the proceeds of his business. Here lies the true object of his pleasure. It is this desire which creates the desire for profit, which leads in turn to his desire to travel. So too in the case of the worlds and themitzvot. G‑d’s external Will, His desire that the worlds exist, is motivated by His desire for the true object of His pleasure — the mitzvot. Thus, the mitzvot represent His innermost will. It is for their sake that G‑d gives life to all the worlds.
כי כל חיותם ושפעם תלוי במעשה המצות של התחתונים כנודע
The very life and sustenance of all the worlds is dependent upon the performance of the mitzvot by the creatures of the lower worlds, as is known — that performing a mitzvah draws G‑dly life and sustenance into all the worlds.
ונמצא שמעשה המצות וקיומן הוא לבוש הפנימי לפנימית רצון העליון
It follows that the performance and fulfillment of the mitzvot is the innermost garment for the innermost aspect of G‑d’s Will,
שממעשה זה נמשך אור וחיות רצון העליון להתלבש בעולמות
since it is due to this performance of the mitzvot that the light and life of the worlds issues forth from the Divine Will, to be clothed in them —
I.e., since G‑d desires the worlds only as a vehicle for the performance of the mitzvot, as explained above, and it is only for this reason that He animates the worlds.
ולכן נקראות אברי דמלכא, דרך משל, כמו שאברי גוף האדם הם לבוש לנפשו, ובטלים לגמרי אליה מכל וכל
Hence the mitzvot are figuratively described as “organs of the King.” For just as the organs of the human body are a garment for its soul, and are completely and utterly surrendered to it,
כי מיד שעולה ברצונו של אדם לפשוט ידו או רגלו הן נשמעות לרצונו תכף ומיד, בלי שום צווי ואמירה להן, ובלי שום שהייה כלל
as is evident from the fact that as soon as a person desires to stretch out his hand or foot, they obey his will immediately, without any command or instruction to them and with no delay whatever,
אלא כרגע ממש כשעלה ברצונו
but at the very instant that it entered his will.
The response of his organs is automatic; one need not consciously occupy himself with activating his hand. As to the phrase, “without any command or instruction”: When one must exert effort in activating his faculties (e.g., when one dislikes a particular task, but forces himself to do it on the strength of logic) this effort is spoken of as an internal command from one faculty to another. However, when one’s will activates the organs of his body, there is no such command involved.
כך דרך משל החיות של מעשה המצות וקיומן הוא בטל לגמרי לגבי רצון העליון המלובש בו, ונעשה לו ממש כגוף לנשמה
Just as the organs of the human body are completely united with one’s soul and are surrendered to it, so too is the life-force animating the performance and fulfillment of the commandments completely surrendered to the Divine Will which is clothed therein, and this life-force becomes, in relation to the Divine Will, like a body to a soul.
וכן הלבוש החיצון של נפש האלקית שבאדם המקיים ועושה המצוה, שהוא כח ובחינת המעשה שלה
Likewise the external garment of the divine soul, i.e., its faculty of action which is external compared to the faculties of speech and thought, since it functions outside oneself, of the person fulfilling and practicing the commandment,
הוא מתלבש בחיות של מעשה המצוה, ונעשה גם כן כגוף לנשמה לרצון העליון, ובטל אליו לגמרי
clothes itself in the vitality of the performance of the mitzvah, and thus it, too, becomes like a body to a soul in relation to the Divine Will; i.e., the soul’s power of action becomes united with the Divine Will in the same way as one’s body is united with his soul, and is completely surrendered to the Divine Will.
ועל כן גם אברי גוף האדם המקיימים המצוה, שכח ובחינת המעשה של נפש האלקית מלובש בהם בשעת מעשה וקיום המצוה, הם נעשו מרכבה ממש לרצון העליון
In this way, those organs of the human body which perform the mitzvah — i.e., those organs in which the divine soul’s faculty of action is clothed during the performance and fulfillment of the mitzvah — they, too, become a veritable vehicle (lit., merkavah — a “chariot”) for the Divine Will.
כגון היד המחלקת צדקה לעניים או עושה מצוה אחרת
For example, the hand which distributes charity to the poor, or performs another commandment becomes, in the act of performing the mitzvah, a “chariot” for the Divine Will.
ורגלים המהלכות לדבר מצוה, וכן הפה ולשון שמדברים דברי תורה, והמוח שמהרהר בדברי תורה ויראת שמים ובגדולת ה‘ ברוך הוא
Similarly the feet which walk for the purpose of fulfilling a mitzvah, or the mouth and tongue which speak words of Torah, or the brain reflecting on the Torah or on the fear of heaven, or on the greatness of G‑d, blessed be He.
When these organs are occupied with the mitzvot they are totally surrendered, like a chariot, to the Divine Will clothed in these mitzvot.
Note that a physical organ becomes merely a chariot for the Divine Will. It does not become surrendered to and unified with the Divine Will to the same extent as the divine soul’s faculty of action, whose unity the Alter Rebbe previously compared to the unity of body and soul. The unity of body and soul surpasses that of the chariot with its rider. Body and soul, although originally two separate, disparate entities, one physical and the other spiritual, become one entity when united. No part of the body is devoid of the soul; conversely, the soul completely adapts itself to the body, becoming transformed into a corporeal life-force. The divine soul’s faculty of action, being a G‑dly power, can achieve this level of unity with G‑d when it is employed in the performance of a mitzvah.
The organs of the body, on the other hand, although they too are involved in fulfilling the mitzvah, can reach no higher than the level illustrated in the analogy of the chariot. A chariot, having no will of its own, is indeed completely subservient to its rider — yet it is not united with him.
וזהו שאמרו רז״ל: האבות הן הן המרכבה
This is what the Sages meant when they said that3 “The Patriarchs are truly the [Divine] chariot,”
שכל אבריהם כולם היו קדושים ומובדלים מענייני עולם הזה, ולא נעשו מרכבה רק לרצון העליון לבדו כל ימיהם
for all their organs were completely holy and detached from mundane matters, and throughout their lives they served as a vehicle for nothing but the Divine Will.
The reason for the Sages’ designating specifically the Patriarchs as G‑d’s chariot, although every Jew’s body becomes a “chariot” when he performs a mitzvah, is that the Patriarchs‘ submission to the Divine Will was unique in its power, its scope, and its consistency. All their organs were totally surrendered to the Divine Will throughout their lives — whereas with other Jews, only those organs which perform a mitzvah are a “chariot”, and then only during the act. In fact, the same organ which today served as a “chariot” to G‑d’s Will might conceivably serve the opposite purpose tomorrow.
* * *
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Cf. I, 24a; II, 60a; Tikkunei Zohar 21b. |
| 2. | Tikkun 30. |
| 3. | Bereishit Rabbah 47:6. |
• Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
• Positive Commandment 7
Swearing in G‑d's Name
"And swear by His Name"—Deuteronomy 10:20.
When necessary to conclusively confirm or deny, we are commanded to swear solely in G‑d's Name. This constitutes an honor for, and exaltation of, G‑d.
It is forbidden to swear in the name of any other entity, such as an angel or constellation, unless the person's intention is only to swear in the name of the one and only Power who created these entities.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• Swearing in G‑d's Name
Positive Commandment 7
Translated by Berel Bell
The 7th mitzvah is that we are commanded to swear in G‑d's name whenever necessary — whether to insure something be done or to prevent ourselves from doing something. [We are required to swear in His name] because it exalts, glorifies, and magnifies G‑d.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "And swear in His name."
Our Sages said explicitly,2 "The Torah tells us 'swear in His name' and 'do not swear.' " This means that just as one may not make an unnecessary oath, which is a prohibition, one is commanded to make a necessary oath, which is a positive commandment.
Therefore, one may not swear in the name of any other creation, such as angels or stars. An exception is where the subject [i.e. G‑d] is obviously omitted, such as one who swears in "the truth of the sun," but means "the true G‑d of [i.e. Who created] the sun." It is in this manner that our nation swears in the name of Moshe — in order to gain honor through [mentioning] his name. It is as if the person uttered the oath, "in the G‑d of Moshe," or "in the One Who sent Moshe." However, when the person uttering the oath does not have this in mind, and swears in the name of a created being having in mind that this object is so true that he can swear on it, he has transgressed, and has "placed an object on the same level as G‑d." The Oral Tradition3 explains that "one who 'places an object on the same level as G‑d' is uprooted from the world."
This is the intention of the verse, "swear in His name," i.e. keep in mind that He alone is the True Existence that it is proper to swear by. In the first chapter of T'murah4 our Sages say, "what is the source that one may take an oath to fulfill a mitzvah? The verse, 'And swear in His name.' "
FOOTNOTES
1.Deut. 10:20.
2.Sh'vuos 35b.
3.Sukkah 45b.
4.3b
• Rambam - 1 Chapter: Rotzeach uShmirat Nefesh Rotzeach uShmirat Nefesh - Chapter Thirteen
• Rotzeach uShmirat Nefesh - Chapter Thirteen
1
When a person encounters a colleague who is on a journey and his animal has fallen under its load, he is commanded to unload the burden from it. This applies whether the animal was carrying a burden appropriate for it, or a burden greater than it could bear.
This is a positive commandment, as Exodus 23:5 states: "You shall certainly help him."
א
מי ה שפגע בחבירו בדרך ובהמתו רובצת תחת משאה בין שהיה עליה משא הראוי לה בין שהיה עליה יותר [א] ממשאה הרי זה מצוה לפרוק מעליה וזו מצות עשה שנאמר עזוב תעזוב עמו:
2
One should not unload the animal and depart, leaving the wayfarer in panic. Instead, one should lift up the animal together with its owner, and reload the animal's burden upon it, as Deuteronomy 22:4 states: "You shall certainly lift it up." This is another positive commandment.
If one leaves the wayfarer in panic without either unloading or reloading, one has negated the observance of a positive commandment and violated a negative commandment, as Deuteronomy, ibid. states: "You shall not see the donkey of your brother... and conceal yourself...."
ב
ולא יפרוק ויניחנו נבהל וילך אלא יקום עמו ויחזור ויטעון משאו עליה שנאמר הקם תקים עמו זו מצות עשה אחרת. ואם הניחו נבהל ולא פרק ולא טען ביטל מצות עשה ועבר על מצות לא תעשה שנאמר לא תראה את חמור אחיך:
3
When a priest sees an animal fallen in a cemetery, he should not contract ritual impurity to unload and reload it, just as he does not contract ritual impurity to return a lost article.
Similarly, if he is an elder, whose practice is not to unload and load animals, since this is beneath his dignity he is not liable.
ג
היה כהן והבהמה רובצת בבית הקברות אינו מתטמא לה כשם שאינו מתטמא להשיב אבידה. וכן אם היה זקן שאין דרכו לטעון ולפרוק הואיל ואינה לפי כבודו פטור:
4
This is the general principle: If the animal were his own and he would unload and reload it, he is obligated to unload and reload it for a colleague.
If he is pious and goes beyond the measure of the law, even if he is a great nasi, and sees an animal belonging to a colleague fallen under a load of straw, reeds or the like, he should unload and load it with its owner.
ד
זה הכלל כל שאילו היתה שלו היה טוען ופורק הרי זה חייב לטעון ולפרוק בשל חבירו. ואם היה [ב] חסיד ועושה לפנים משורת הדין אפילו היה הנשיא הגדול וראה בהמת חבירו רובצת תחת משאה של תבן או קנים וכיוצא בהן פורק וטוען עמו:
5
If one unloaded and reloaded the animal, and it fell again, one is obligated to unload and reload it another time, indeed even 100 times, This is indicated by the verbs עזוב תעזוב and הקם תקים in the proof-texts cited above.
For this reason, one must accompany the animal for a parsah, unless the owner of the burden says that it is not necessary.
ה
פרק וטען וחזרה ונפלה חייב לטעון ולפרוק פעם אחרת אפילו מאה פעמים שנאמר עזוב תעזוב הקם תקים עמו. לפיכך צריך להדדות עמו עד פרסה אלא אם כן אומר לו בעל המשא איני צריך לך:
6
When does one become obligated to unload and reload together with its owner? When he sees the fallen animal in a way that can be described as an encounter. For Exodus 23:5 states "When you see your colleague's donkey..." and the previous verse states: "When you encounter...."
How far a distance is implied? Our Sages determined it as being a distance of 266 2/3 cubits - i.e., 1/7.5 of a mil. If a person was further away from a fallen animal, he is not obligated.
ו
מאימתי יתחייב לפרוק ולטעון עמו משיראהו ראייה שהיא כפגיעה שהרי נאמר כי תראה ונאמר כי תפגע. וכמה, שיערו חכמים משיהיה ביניהם מאתים וששים ושש אמה ושני שלישי אמה שהוא אחד משבעה ומחצה במיל. היה רחוק ממנו יתר מזה אינו זקוק לה:
7
It is a mitzvah from the Torah to unload an animal without charge. Loading it, however, is a mitzvah for which one may charge. Similarly, for the time when one accompanies the animal for a parsah, one may receive payment.
ז
מצוה מן התורה לפרוק עמו בחנם. אבל לטעון עליו הרי זו מצוה ונוטל [ג] שכרו וכן בשעה שמדדה עמו עד פרסה יש לו שכר:
8
If one finds an animal belonging to a colleague fallen under its load, it is a mitzvah to unload and reload it even if its owner is not present, for "You shall certainly help" and "You shall certainly lift up..." implies that one must fulfill these mitzvot in all situations.
If so, why does the Torah say "together with him" i.e., the animal's owner? To teach that if the owner of the animal was there and goes off to the side, telling the passerby, "Since you have a mitzvah, if you would like to unload it yourself, unload it," the passerby is not obligated. This is implied by "together with him."
If the owner of the animal was old or ailing, the passerby is obligated to load and unload the animal by himself.
ח
מצא בהמת חבירו רבוצה אע"פ שאין הבעלים עמה מצוה לפרוק מעליה ולטעון עליה שנאמר עזוב תעזוב הקם תקים מכל מקום. אם כן למה נאמר עמו שאם היה בעל הבהמה שם והלך וישב לו ואמר לזה שפגע בו הואיל ועליך מצוה אם רצית לפרוק לבדך פרוק הרי זה פטור שנאמר עמו. ואם היה בעל הבהמה זקן או חולה חייב לטעון ולפרוק לבדו:
9
The following rules apply when the animal [that has fallen is owned by a gentile, but the burden it is carrying is owned by a Jew. If the gentile is the one driving his donkey, one is not obligated toward him. If not, one is obligated to unload and reload it because of the distress suffered by the Jew.
Similarly, if the animal that has fallen is owned by a Jew, but the burden it is carrying is owned by a gentile, one is obligated to unload and reload it because of the distress suffered by the Jew.
When, however, both the animal and the burden are owned by a gentile, a passerby is not obligated to concern himself with the animal, unless there is the possibility that animosity will be aroused.
ט
בהמת העובד כוכבים והמשא של ישראל אם היה העובד כוכבים מחמר אחר בהמתו אינו זקוק לה. ואם לאו חייב לפרוק ולטעון משום צער ישראל. וכן אם היתה הבהמה של ישראל והמשוי של עובד כוכבים חייב לפרוק ולטעון משום צער [ד] ישראל אבל בהמת העובד כוכבים ומשאו אינו חייב להטפל בו אלא משום איבה:
10
When the legs of a donkey owned by one of the donkey drivers in a caravan are shaky, his colleagues may not proceed and pass before him. If it falls, the other donkey drivers may pass him.
י
חמרים שרגליו של אחד מהן רעועות אינן רשאין חביריו להקדים ולעבור מעליו. נפל רשאין לעבור מעליו:
11
If one donkey was laden with a burden, and another was carrying a rider, and the way became too narrow for both of them, the rider must move to the side to allow the laden donkey to proceed.
If one donkey was laden with a burden, and another was burden-less, the burden-less one must move to the side to allow the laden donkey to proceed. If one was carrying a rider, and another was burden-less, the burden-less one must move to the side to allow the donkey carrying a rider to proceed.
if both are laden with burdens, carrying riders or burden-less, the owners should negotiate a compromise.
יא
היה אחד טעון ואחד רוכב ודחקן הדרך. מעבירין את הרוכב מפני הטעון. אחד טעון ואחד ריקן מעבירין את הריקן מפני הטעון. אחד רכוב ואחד ריקן מעבירין את הריקן מפני הרכוב. שניהן טעונין שניהן רוכבין שניהן ריקנין עושין פשרה ביניהן:
12
Similarly, there are criteria laid down when two ships that are passing through the same straits confront each other, and if they both try to pass at the same time they would sink, but they could pass one by one, or when two camels that are climbing a high pass confront each other, and if they both try to pass at the same time they would fall, but they could pass one by one.
What should they do? If one was carrying cargo, and another was burden-less, the burden-less one should move to the side in favor of the one that was carrying cargo. If one was close to the port or city from which it set out and one was further removed, the one that was closer should move to the side in favor of the one that was further removed.
If they are both far removed, both close or both laden with cargo, and they both share the same difficulty, they should come to a compromise and reach a financial settlement between themselves. With regard to such situations, it is said Leviticus 19:15: "Judge your colleague with righteousness."
יב
וכן שתי ספינות העוברות ופוגעות זו בזו אם עוברות שתיהן בבת אחת טובעות ואם בזו אחר זו עוברות. וכן שני גמלים העולים במעלה גבוה ופגעו זה בזה אם עוברין שניהם בבת אחת נופלין ואם בזה אחר זה עולין. כיצד הן עושין. טעונה ושאינה טעונה תדחה שאינה טעונה מפני הטעונה. קרובה ורחוקה תדחה קרובה מפני שאינה קרובה. שתיהן רחוקות או קרובות או טעונות הואיל וכולן בדוחק אחד הטל פשרה ביניהן והן מעלות שכר זה לזה. ובזה וכיוצא בו נאמר בצדק תשפוט עמיתך:
13
When a person encounters two individuals: one whose donkey is fallen under its load and one with a donkey whose burden has been unloaded, but who cannot find anyone to help him reload it, it is a mitzvah to unload the fallen donkey first, because of the discomfort suffered by the animal. Afterwards, he should reload the other animal.
When does the above apply? When the two people he encounters are both friends or both enemies. If, however, the one whose donkey must be reloaded is an enemy and the other is a friend, it is a mitzvah for the passerby to reload his enemy's donkey first, in order to subjugate his evil inclination.
יג
הפוגע בשנים אחד רובץ תחת משאו ואחד פרק מעליו ולא מצא מי שיטעון עמו. מצוה לפרוק בתחילה משום צער בעלי חיים ואחר כך טוען. במה דברים אמורים כשהיו שניהם שונאים או אוהבים. אבל אם היה אחד שונא ואחד אוהב מצוה לטעון עם השונא תחילה כדי לכוף את יצרו הרע:
14
The enemy mentioned in the Torah is not a gentile, but rather a Jew.
One might ask: How is it possible for one Jew to hate another? Is it not written Leviticus 19:17: "Do not hate your brother in your heart"?
Our Sages explained that this is referring to a person who while alone sees a colleague violate a transgression and rebukes him, but the colleague did not cease transgressing. In such an instance, it is a mitzvah to hate the person until he repents and abandons his wickedness.
Even if he did not repent yet, if one sees him in panic because of his cargo, it is a mitzvah to unload and reload with him, instead of leaving him inclined toward death, lest he tarry because of his money and be brought to danger. For the Torah showed concern for the lives of the Jewish people, both the wicked and the righteous, for they are attached to God and believe in the fundamentals of our faith. And Ezekiel 33:11 states: "Say to them, 'As I live,' says God, the Lord, 'Do I desire the death of a wicked man? I desire that the wicked return from his path and live.'
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
With the help of the Almighty, the eleventh book has been completed.
The number of chapters in this book are 62.
Hilchot Nizkei Mammon has 14 chapters.
Hilchot Geneivah has 9 chapters.
Hilchot Gezelah Va'Avedah has 18 chapters.
Hilchot Chovel UMazik has 8 chapters.
Hilchot Rotzeach USh'mirat HaNefesh has 13 chapters.
יד
השונא שנאמר בתורה לא מאומות העולם הוא אלא מישראל והיאך יהיה לישראל שונא מישראל והכתוב אומר לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך. אמרו חכמים כגון שראהו לבדו שעבר עבירה והתרה בו ולא חזר הרי זה מצוה לשונאו עד שיעשה תשובה וישוב מרשעו. ואע"פ שעדיין לא עשה תשובה אם מצאו נבהל במשאו מצוה לטעון ולפרוק עמו ולא יניחנו נוטה למות שמא ישהה בשביל ממונו ויבא לידי סכנה. והתורה הקפידה על נפשות ישראל. בין רשעים בין צדיקים מאחר שהם נלוים אל ה' ומאמינים בעיקר הדת. שנאמר אמור אליהם חי אני נאם ה' אלהים אם אחפוץ במות הרשע כי אם בשוב רשע מדרכו וחיה:
• Shvuot - Chapter 10
1
If [both] or one of [the plaintiff's] witnesses was unacceptable, a relative,1 or even one of those disqualified from testifying by Rabbinic decree, the king - who is not fit to give testimony2 - was one of his witnesses, or the witnesses heard the testimony from other witnesses,3 [although] they both denied [knowing testimony] and took an oath, they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut,4 for had they testified, they would not have obligated [the defendant] to pay.5
א
היו עדיו או אחד מהן פסול או קרוב ואפילו מפסולי עדות של דבריהם, או שהיה המלך אחד מעדיו שאינו ראוי להעיד, או שהיו עד מפי עד וכפרו ונשבעו פטורין משבועת העדות שאילו (הודו) העידו לא היו מחייבין בעדותן ממון.
2
[If the plaintiff said:] "I am administering an oath to you that you come and testify on my behalf that so-and-so promised to give me 200 zuz, but he did not," and [the witnesses] denied [knowledge of the matter] and took an oath, they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut. For even if they would testify concerning the matter, the defendant would not be liable financially because of his statement.6 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
ב
משביע אני עליכם שתבאו ותעידו לי שאמר איש פלוני שיתן לי מאתים זוז ולא נתן וכפרו הרי אלו פטורין משבועת העדות, שאם העידו בדבר זה לא יתחייב הנתבע ממון באמירתו, וכן כל כיוצא בזה.
3
If one charged [witnesses] with testifying that he was a priest or a Levite, or that he was not the son of a woman who underwent divorce or chalitzah,7 and [the witnesses] denied [knowledge of the matter] and took an oath, they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut. For this is not a financial claim.
ג
תבען להעיד לו שהוא כהן או לוי או שאינו בן גרושה או בן חלוצה וכפרו ונשבעו פטורין משבועת העדות שאין כאן עדות ממון.
4
[Similarly, although the witnesses] denied [knowledge of the matter] and took an oath, they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut [if the plaintiff] charges them with testifying [with regard to the following claims]:
his son inflicted a wound upon him,
so-and-so kindled his grainheap on the Sabbath,
so-and-so raped or seduced his virgin daughter who had been consecrated.
ד
תבען שיעידו לו שחבל בו בנו ושהדליק פלוני גדישו בשבת ושאנס פלוני או פתה בתו המאורסה וכפרו ונשבעו פטורין משבועת העדות, שאם העידו עדות זו יתחייב הנתבע מיתת ב"ד ואינו חייב תשלומין כמו שבארנו בהלכות נערה וכן כל כיוצא בזה.
5
If there was [only] one witness, he denied [knowledge of a financial claim], and an oath was administered to him, he is not liable for a sh'vuat haedut. [The rationale is that] the testimony of one witness does not obligate financial payment.10
ה
היה עד אחד וכפר והשביעו פטור משבועת העדות שאין עדות עד אחד מחייבת ממון.
6
If one charged two witnesses with testifying that his wife committed adultery and they denied [knowledge of the matter] and took an oath to that effect, they are liable for a sh'vuat haedut. For if they had testified, they would have caused her to forfeit [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.11 Thus the one who charged them with testifying would be freed from liability. Hence the witnesses have denied a financial claim.
ו
תבע את שני עדיו שיעידו לו שזנתה אשתו וכפרו ונשבעו הרי אלו חייבין בשבועת העדות, שאילו העידו היה מפסידין לה כתובתה ויפטר זה שתבען והרי כפרו בעדות ממון.
7
If [a husband] charges witnesses - [either witnesses] who observed him administering a [sotah] warning12 or those who observed her entering into privacy with the man concerning whom she was warned - with testifying, and they denied [knowledge of the matter] and took an oath to that effect, they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut. [The rationale is that] even if they had testified, [the testimony] would not result in a financial claim only in the obligation to have her drink [the sotah] waters. Although this testimony [can] cause her to forfeit [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah if she does not drink [the sotah waters],13 a matter that could lead to a financial claim is not considered as a financial claim. For it is possible that she will drink the waters and not invalidate her ketubah.
ז
תבע עדי קנוי או עדי סתירה וכפרו ונשבעו פטורין משבועת העדות שאילו העידו אין חיוב ממון כאן אלא להשקותה בלבד, ואע"פ שעדות זו גורמת לה שתפסיד כתובתה אם לא תשתה דבר שגורם לממון אינו כממון שהרי אפשר שתשתה ולא תשבור כתובתה.
8
[A witness] is liable for a sh'vuat haedut [in the following situation. A man] issued a [sotah] warning to his wife. She entered into privacy [as observed by] two witnesses and then committed adultery, [as observed by] one witness after being warned and entering into privacy. If [the husband] administered an oath to this witness that he come and testify and he denied knowledge [of the matter], he is liable. Although he is only one witness, if he would have delivered this testimony, the woman would have been divorced without receiving [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah as explained in Hilchot Sotah.14
ח
הרי שקנא לאשתו ונסתרה בעדים וזנתה בעד אחד אחר הקנוי והסתירה והשביע עד זה שיבא ויעיד וכפר חייב בשבועת העדות שאע"פ שהוא עד אחד אילו העיד עדות זו היתה יוצאה בלא כתובה כמו שבארנו בהלכות סוטה.
9
Similarly, in any other instance where the testimony of one witness creates a financial obligation, if that witness denies knowledge [of the matter] and took an oath or an oath was administered to him in court supporting his denial, he is liable for a sh'vuat haedut.
ט
וכן כל עד אחד שמחייב ממון בעדותו אם כפר ונשבע או שהשביעו בבית דין וכפר חייב משום שבועת העדות.
10
What is implied? Both the plaintiff and the defendant were reputed [to take false] oaths15and hence they are not given the opportunity to take oaths, [the plaintiff] administered an oath to one witness that he should come and testify that so-and-so owes him a maneh and he denied [knowledge of the matter], he is liable for a sh'vuat haedut. For were he to have testified, the defendant would have been required to pay because of his testimony, as will be explained in Hilchot To'en.16 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
י
כיצד כגון שהיה התובע והנתבע חשודין על השבועה שאין משביעין אותם והשביע לעד אחד שיבא ויעיד לו שיש לו ביד זה מנה וכפר הרי זה חייב משום שבועת העדות שאילו העיד היה הנתבע הזה משלם ממון בעדותו כמו שיתבאר בהלכות טוען וכן כל כיוצא בזה.
11
When a woman administers an oath to one witness that he testify regarding the death of her husband and he denies [knowledge of the matter], he is liable for a sh'vuat haedut. Were he to have testified, she would have married and received [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.17
יא
האשה שהשביעה עד אחד שיעיד לה במיתת בעלה וכפר חייב בשבועת העדות שאילו העיד היתה נשאת ונוטלת כתובתה.
12
When does the above apply? When she could have collected [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah from movable property.18 If, however, she could only have collected [this sum] by expropriating landed property, [the witness] is not liable for a sh'vuat haedut. This also applies if there are two witnesses, for when one administers an oath [to witnesses for claims] involving landed property, they are not liable [for a sh'vuat haedut,] as we explained.19
יב
במה דברים אמורים כשהיה לה לגבות כתובתה מן המטלטלין אבל אם אין לה לגבות כתובתה אלא מן הקרקע הרי זה פטור משבועת העדות, וכן אם היו שנים, שהמשביע עדי קרקע פטורין כמו שבארנו.
13
When a person administers an oath to witnesses in a court and both denied [knowledge of the matter] at once, e.g., the second witness began his denial immediately after the statements of his colleague,20 they are both liable for a sh'vuat haedut. Each one of them must bring a sin offering21 for his oath. If the first one denied [knowledge of the matter] and the second witness waited longer than the appointed time period and then denied [knowledge of the matter], the first [witness] is liable for a sh'vuat haedut and the second is exempt. For even if the second had acknowledged [the obligation], his testimony would not have obligated [the defendant] financially.22
יג
השביע עדיו בבית דין וכפרו שניהם כאחת, כגון שהתחיל השני לכפור בתוך כדי דבורו של חבירו שניהם חייבין בשבועת העדות וכל אחד ואחד מביא חטאתו על שבועתו, כפר הראשון ושהה העד השני יותר מכדי דיבור ואח"כ כפר, הראשון חייב בשבועת העדות והשני פטור משבועת העדות, שאילו הודה זה השני לא היתה עדותו מחייבת ממון.
14
If one of the witnesses acknowledged [the claim] and the other denied [knowledge of it], the one who denied is liable whether he made his denial before [the other witness' acknowledgement] or afterwards.23 If they both denied [knowledge of the matter] at the same time and then one took the initiative and acknowledged [the matter] immediately thereafter,24 he is exempt and the witness that persists in his denial is liable for a sh'vuat haedut.
יד
הודה אחד וכפר אחד הכופר חייב בין שכפר בתחלה בין שכפר בסוף, כפרו שניהם כאחד וקדם האחד והודה בתוך כדי דיבור ה"ז פטור והעומד בכפירתו חייב בשבועת העדות.
15
When a person administered an oath to two pairs of witnesses who are both fit to deliver testimony and the first group denied [knowledge of the matter] and then the second pair denied knowledge of the matter, the first are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut. [The rationale is that] they are relying on the testimony of the second pair and that testimony is sufficient to expropriate money. Hence the defendant would not be liable to make financial restitution because of the testimony of these [witnesses] who denied [knowledge of the matter] alone.25
If the second pair of witnesses were related to the plaintiff or to the defendant by marriage and their wives were on their deathbeds, the first pair of witnesses are also liable. For at the time the first pair made their denial, the second pair were not fit to give testimony even though they will soon be fit to give testimony when [the women] on their deathbeds die.26 If the second pair make their denial after their wives die, they are liable for a sh'vuat haedut.
טו
השביע שתי כתי עדים ושתיהן ראויות להעיד, וכפרה כת ראשונה ואחר כך כפרה כת שניה, הראשונה פטורה משבועת העדות מפני שהן סמוכין על עדות שניה ואפשר להוציא הממון בעדות הכת האחרת ונמצא זה הנתבע אינו חייב לשלם בעדות אלו שכפרו לבדה, היתה הכת השניה קרובין לתובע או לנתבע בנשותיהן והרי הן גוססות אף הראשונה חייבת, שהרי השניה בעת כפירת הראשונה לא היתה ראויה להעיד ואף על פי שבמהרה יהיו ראויין כשימותו אלו הגוססות, ואם כפרה השניה אחר שמתו נשותיהן חייבין בשבועת העדות.
16
When a person charges his witnesses with testifying on his behalf and they deny [knowledge of the matter], he administers an oath and they answer Amen,27 he administers an oath four or five times and they respond to each oath outside the court, and when they come to the court, they acknowledge [the matter] and testify, they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut, as we explained.28
If [when] they came to court, they persisted in their denial, they are liable for every one of the oaths [administered] outside the court.29
טז
התובע את העדים להעיד לו וכפרו והשביען וענו אמן והשביען ארבע וחמש פעמים והן עונין אחר כל שבועה ושבועה חוץ לבית דין וכשבאו לבית דין הודו והעידו הרי אלו פטורין משבועת העדות כמו שבארנו, ואם באו לבית דין ועמדו בכפירתן חייבין על כל אחת ואחת מאותן השבועות שחוץ לבית דין.
17
When does the above30 apply? When they answered Amen. If, however, they did not answer Amen, but [merely] denied [knowledge of the matter] after every oath, they are not liable unless the oath is administered in court, as we explained.31[The rationale is that] they did not utter the oath themselves or answer Amen.
יז
במה דברים אמורים בשענו אמן אבל אם לא ענו אמן אלא כפרו על כל שבועה ושבועה הואיל ולא הוציאו שבועה מפיהם ולא ענו אמן הרי אלו פטורין עד שישביעם בבית דין ויכפרו בו שם כמו שבארנו. 35
18
If [the plaintiff] administered an oath to [the witnesses] in court and they denied [knowledge of the matter] and then he administered an oath again four or five times and they deny [knowledge of the matter] each time, they are liable only once for a sh'vuat haedut.32 [This applies whether the oath was administered] in court or outside the court and even if they answered Amen or took the oath on their initiative time after time. [The rationale is that] after they denied [knowledge of the matter] in court, were they to retract and admit [knowledge of it], their testimony would no longer be effective.33
יח
השביען בבית דין וכפרו וחזר והשביען ארבע וחמש פעמים והן כופרין על כל אחת ואחת בין חוץ לבית דין בין בפני בית דין ואפילו ענו אמן או נשבעו מפי עצמן פעם אחר פעם אינן חייבין משום שבועת העדות אלא אחת מפני שאחר שכפרו בבית דין אם חזרו והודו אין עדותן מועלת כלום.
19
It can thus be derived that all the oaths that they take after denying [knowledge of the matter] in court involve a denial of testimony that would not obligate [the defendant] financially. [In that instance, the witnesses] are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut, but they are liable for a sh'vuat bitui, as we explained.34
יט
נמצאת למד שכל השבועות שנשבעו אחר שכפרו בבית דין הן על כפירת עדות שאינה מחייבת ממון שהן פטורין עליה משבועת העדות וחייבין בשבועת ביטוי כמו שבארנו.
FOOTNOTES
1.
Relatives are also among these unacceptable as witnesses. See Hilchot Edut from ch. 9 onward for a detailed discussion of which witnesses are not acceptable.
2.
See the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh to Hilchot Melachim 3:7) which explains that since we are required to hold the king in awe, he is not allowed to testify. See also Hilchot Edut 11:9.
3.
In which instance, their testimony would not be effective in cases of monetary law.
4.
It would seem that according to the Rambam, they are liable for a sh'vuat bitui. The same law applies with regard to the subsequent halachot. See Chapter 9, Halachah 14.
5.
Since their testimony is not effective, they are not liable.
6.
Making such a statement does not create a binding financial obligation (Sh'vuot 35a).
7.
I.e., were his mother to have undergone either divorce or chalitzah, he would be disqualified from the priesthood.
8.
The son is liable for execution for wounding his father (Hilchot Mamrim 5:5), the kindler is liable for desecrating the Sabbath, and the seducer or rapist for adultery.
9.
Hilchot Na'arah Betulah 1:13 explains that this concept is derived from the exegesis of Exodus 21:22.
10.
As stated in Hilchot To'en V'Nitan 1:2, one witness does not make one liable financially, but it does require an oath. There are times when this requirement will also lead to financial payment, for the defendant may chose to pay rather than to take the oath. Nevertheless, since the matter depends on the defendant's choice and not the witness's testimony, he is not liable for a sh'vuat haedut. See Chapter 8, Halachah 1. Nevertheless, as stated in Halachot 8-10 of this chapter, when the testimony of one witness does create an obligation for financial payment, the witness is liable for a sh'vuat haedut.
11.
For a woman who commits adultery forfeits all the privileges granted her in her ketubah (ante nuptial agreement). See Hilchot Ishut 24:6.
Generally, a person who is guilty of a transgression that involves capital punishment is not held liable for any financial responsibility. This case, however, is an exception, because the woman is not paying anything. It is just that her conduct voids her husband's obligation to pay her.
12.
In the era of the Temple, when a man suspected his wife of committing adultery, he would warn her not to enter into privacy with the suspect. Two witnesses had to observe that warning being given. If she in fact entered into privacy with him afterwards as verified by two witnesses, she would have to drink the special sotah waters. If she had indeed committed adultery, the water would cause internal hemorrhaging and she would die. If she was innocent, she would be granted blessings. Here we are speaking of the husband charging either of these two pairs of witnesses to testify.
13.
See Hilchot Sotah 2:1.
14.
Hilchot Sotah 1:14. Since there are witnesses who testify that she received a warning and that she entered into privacy with the man who was singled out, there is basis to assume that she committed adultery with him. Hence the testimony of one witness is sufficient.
15.
See Hilchot To'en V'Nitan 2:1 that mentions the individuals placed in this category: those who took false oaths in the past and those disqualified from testifying because of transgressions they performed.
16.
Hilchot To'en V'Nitan 2:4.
17.
See Hilchot Gerushin 12:15 which states that our Sages were lenient and accepted the testimony of only one witness in order to allow a woman to remarry. And since they allowed her to remarry on that basis, they also allowed her to collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.
18.
I.e., she took possession of movable property during the lifetime of her husband and after his death, sought to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from it. Otherwise, the moveable property left by her husband is not under lien to his obligations and she must expropriate his landed property. This applies according to the ruling of the Talmud. At present, however, our Rabbis have ordained that a person's movable property is on lien to all of his debts (Radbaz; see Hilchot Ishut 16:8).
19.
Chapter 9, Halachah 3. This ruling also applies to the situation described in Halachah 11.
20.
The term the Rambam uses has a specific halachic meaning: the time it takes to say: "Shalom Elecha Rabbi, as stated in Chapter 2, Halachah 17.
21.
More specifically, an adjustable guilt offering, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 12.
22.
Since the first witness denied knowledge of the matter, the testimony of the second witness will not be effective, for he is only one witness.
23.
He is liable, for had he testified, his testimony would have obligated the defendant.
24.
I.e., within the time period, toch k'dei dibbur, mentioned above. Even if he completed his own statements, his colleague spoke, and then he made the denial, he is exempt. See Chapter 2, Halachah 18.
25.
And hence they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut as stated in Chapter 9, Halachah 1.
26.
As long as a person is alive, he or she is considered as alive with regard to all the halachic ramifications of that state.
This and the following clause apply when the witnesses observed the testimony before they married the women in question. Otherwise, their testimony will not be acceptable, for they must be fit to testify both at the time they witness the testimony and at the time they deliver it in court.
27.
This constitutes acceptance of the oath. If, however, they remain silent outside the court, they are not considered to have accepted the oath.
28.
As stated in Chapter 9, Halachah 2, for witnesses to be liable, they must make their denial in court.
They are, however, liable for a sh'vuat bitui for every oath they accepted outside the court (Radbaz).
29.
For the same denial applies to all of them. Since they never denied the matter in court, each denial they make is still significant (in contrast to the instance mentioned in Halachah 18).
30.
That they are liable for an oath administered outside the court.
31.
Chapter 9, Halachot 1, 10.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam concerning this issue, stating that he has made a great error in interpreting the difference of opinion between Rabbi Meir and the Sages mentioned in Sh'vuot 30b. The Ra'avad maintains that their difference of opinion concerns only whether the denial of knowledge of the matter must be made in the presence of the court or outside of it. Both, however, agree that an oath is significant, whether made in the presence of the court or outside of it. The Rambam, however, maintains that since the witnesses did not take the oath themselves or respond to it, they are not liable. It is only when the oath is administered in court that the oath is significant even though the witnesses do not respond to it.
32.
They are, however, liable for a sh'vuat bitui as stated in the following halachah.
33.
As stated in Hilchot Edut 3:5, once witnesses testify in court, they cannot change that testimony. Since their testimony would no longer have an effect, they are not liable for a sh'vuat haedut.
34.
Chapter 9, Halachah 14. This also applies to all the other instances in this chapter where it was stated that the witnesses were not liable for a sh'vuat haedut.
35.
במה דברים אמורים בשענו אמן וכו'. א"א הא לא כר"מ ולא כרבנן וטעות גדולה נכנסה בו, ודע דר"מ ורבנן בשבועת העדות ושבועת הפקדון מודו דשבועה גופה אפילו היתה חוך /חוץ/ לב"ד חייב ולא פליגי אלא בכפירתם דר"מ סבר שבועת העדות מפי עצמן אפילו כפרו חוץ לב"ד חייבין ואע"פ שהודו בבית דין מ"מ מפקדון גמרינן לה ודון מינה ומינה ורבנן סברי כפירה בב"ד בעינן דון מינה ואוקי באתרה ובשבועת הפקדון סבר ר' מאיר מפי אחרים בעינן כפירה בב"ד דומיא דעדות ואם כפר חוץ לב"ד והודה בב"ד פטור ורבנן סברי מפי אחרים כיון דכפר חייב.
Shvuot - Chapter 11
1
Just as there is a negative commandment forbidding an oath taken in vain and a false oath,1 so, too, there is a positive commandment for a person who is obligated to take an oath in court2 to take that oath in God's name,3 as [Deuteronomy 6:13] states: "And you shall take an oath in His name." This is a positive commandment.4 For taking an oath in His great and holy name is one of the paths of His service. It is a great measure of glorification and sanctification to take an oath in God's name.5
א
כשם ששבועת שוא ושקר בלא תעשה, כך מצות עשה שישבע מי שנתחייב שבועה בבית דין בשם שנאמר ובשמו תשבע זו מצות עשה, שהשבועה בשמו הגדול והקדוש מדרכי העבודה היא והדור וקדוש גדול הוא להשבע בשמו.
2
It is forbidden to take an oath on any other matter together with God's name.6 Whoever combines another matter with the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, in an oath will be uprooted from this world.7 For there is no one who is fit to give honor by taking an oath in his name except the [Absolute] One, blessed be He.
ב
ואסור להשבע בדבר אחר עם שמו, וכל המשתף דבר אחר עם שם הקדוש ברוך הוא בשבועה נעקר מן העולם, שאין שם מי שראוי לחלוק לו כבוד שנשבעין בשמו אלא האחד ברוך הוא.
3
It is permitted for a person to take an oath to fulfill a mitzvah in order to encourage himself [toward its performance]. Although he is under oath [to observe] it from Mount Sinai [onward],8 [he may take an oath, as implied by Psalms 119:106]: "I took an oath and I will uphold it - to observe Your righteous judgments."9
ג
ומותר לאדם להשבע על המצוה לעשותה כדי לזרז את עצמו ואע"פ שהוא מושבע עליה מהר סיני שנאמר נשבעתי ואקיימה לשמור משפטי צדקך.
4
The oath which the judges administer to individuals who are obligated to take an oath is called: "The oath of the judges." [This applies whether the person] is liable for an oath according to Scriptural Law or according to Rabbinic Law.
ד
שבועה זו שמשביעין הדיינים למי שנתחייב שבועה היא הנקראת שבועת הדיינין, בין שהיה חייב בשבועה זו מן התורה בין שהיה חייב בה מדברי סופרים.
5
There are three types of oaths for which one is obligated according to Scriptural Law:
a) A claim involving movable property10 was lodged against a person by a colleague. He admitted liability for a portion and denied liability for a portion.11
b) [The defendant] denied liability for all the movable property, but one witness testifies against him, contradicting his statements.12
These two oaths come in response to a definite claim and a denial.13
c) When a watchman claims that the article entrusted to him was lost, stolen, died, or the like, he is required to take an oath, because of the doubt, for the owner of the entrusted article does not know if the watchman is making a true claim or not.14 This oath is of Scriptural origin, as [Exodus 22:10] states: "The oath of God will be between them." 15
ה
שלשה מיני שבועות הן שחייבין בהן מן התורה, ואלו הן: מי שטענו חבירו מטלטלין והודה במקצתן וכפר במקצתן, ומי שכפר בכל המטלטלין שטענו ועד אחד מעיד עליו ומכחישו הרי אלו שתי שבועות על ידי טענת ודאי וכפירה, וכן שומר שטוען שאבד דבר שהפקידו אצלו או נגנב או מת וכיוצא בזה הרי זה נשבע מספק, שאין בעל הפקדון יודע אם אמת טוען זה השומר או שקר, והוא נשבע מן התורה שנאמר שבועת ה' תהיה בין שניהם.
6
All oaths which the judges require aside from these three are of Rabbinic origin. They are also called "the oath of the judges." Within these oaths of Rabbinic origin, there are also two categories:
a) Oaths administered because of a definite claim and denial: e.g., the oath [taken by] a hired worker,16 [the oath taken by] one who impugns his promissory note,17 and the like.18
b) Oaths taken when [the plaintiff] has a claim of a doubtful nature, e.g., the oaths taken by partners, sharecroppers, and the like.19
In the laws of financial matters, the obligation of all these types of oaths and the associated laws will be explained.
ו
כל שבועה שמשביעין אותה הדיינין חוץ משלשה מיני שבועות אלו הרי הוא מדברי סופרים וגם היא הנקראת שבועת הדיינין, וגם שבועות אלו מדבריהם שני מיני שבועות הן, יש מהן שבועות על ידי טענת ודאי וכפירה כגון שבועת שכיר ופוגם שטרו וכיוצא בהן, ויש מהן שבועות בטענת ספק כגון שבועת השותפין והאריסין וכיוצא בהן, ובדיני ממונות יתבאר חיוב כל אחת ואחת מאלו השבועות ודיניהם.
7
ז
ויש שם שבועה אחרת והיא תקנת חכמי הגמרא והיא הנקראת שבועת הסת, ואע"פ שבית דין משביעין אותה [היום] אינה נקראת שבועת הדיינין.
8
An oath of the judges, whether of Scriptural or Rabbinic origin, whether stemming from a definite or an indefinite claim is [administered in] the following [manner]: The person taking the oath holds a Torah scroll22 in his arm.23 He must stand24 and take the oath or recite a curse using God's name or one of the terms used to describe Him. [Either] he pronounces the oath himself or it is pronounced by the judges. My masters25 ruled that an oath of the judges is administered only in Lashon HaKodesh.26
ח
ושבועת הדיינין בין שהיתה של תורה או של דברי סופרים בין על טענת ודאי בין על טענת ספק כך היא, הנשבע אוחז ספר תורה בזרועו והוא עומד ונשבע בשם או בכינוי בשבועה או באלה מפיו או מפי הדיינין, והורו רבותי שאין משביעין שבועת הדיינין אלא בלשון הקדש.
9
What is meant by an oath pronounced by [the defendant] himself? For example, he says: "I am taking an oath by God, the Lord of Israel...",27 "...by He whose name is graciousness...", "...by He whose name is mercy that I am not liable to this person at all." Similarly, if he says: "May one28 be cursed to God..." or "...cursed to He whose name is graciousness if I owes anything to that person."
ט
כיצד מפיו, כגון שיאמר הריני נשבע בה' אלהי ישראל או במי ששמו חנון או במי ששמו רחום שאיני חייב לזה כלום, וכן אם אמר הרי הוא ארור לה' או ארור למי ששמו חנון אם יש לזה אצלי כלום.
10
What is meant by an oath pronounced by the judges? For example, they tell him: We are administering an oath to you by God, the Lord of Israel...", "...by He whose name is graciousness that you are not liable to this person at all" and [the defendant] answers Amen.29 Or they say: "May so-and-so be cursed to God..." or "...cursed to He whose name is graciousness if he owes money to that person and does not acknowledge the debt" and [the defendant] answers Amen. This is the oath of the judges.
י
וכיצד מפי הדיינין כגון שאמרו לו משביעין אנו אותך בה' אלהי ישראל או במי ששמו חנון שאין לזה בידך כלום והוא עונה אמן, או שאמרו הרי פלוני בן פלוני ארור לה' אלהי ישראל או למי ששמו חנון אם יש לפלוני אצלו ממון ולא יודה לו והוא עונה אמן זו היא שבועת הדיינין.
11
When the judges administer an oath without the defendant holding a [sacred] article in his hand, they have made an error. He must take the oath again while holding a Torah scroll in his hand.30 If he was holding tefillin when they administered the oath to him, he is not required to take the oath again. For he held [an article equivalent to] the Torah in his hand,31 for they are like a scroll. If they administered the oath while [the defendant] was sitting, he does not have to take the oath again.
יא
הדיינין שהשביעו בלא נקיטת חפץ בידו הרי אלו טועים, וחוזר ונשבע וספר תורה בידו, ואם אחז תפילין בידו והשביעוהו אינו חוזר ונשבע שהרי אחז תורה בידו וכמו ספר הן, השביעוהו מיושב אינו חוזר ונשבע.
12
יב
תלמיד חכם לכתחילה משביעין אותו מיושב ותפילין בידו ואינו צריך ליטול ספר תורה אלא תפילין בכפו חפץ הוא ונשבע בלשון הקדש כמו שבארנו.
13
There is no difference between a sh'vuat heset and an oath of the judges except that [the latter] must be taken [while] holding a sacred article and a person who takes a sh'vuat heset does not hold a Torah scroll. Instead, an oath is administered to him by God's name or using one of the terms used to describe Him,34 either an oath or a curse which he utters or which the court states, as is the practice with regard to the oath of the judges. It has already become the universal custom for the synagogue attendant or another person to hold a Torah scroll while a sh'vuat heset is being administered to cast fear [into the heart of the defendant].
יג
אין בין שבועת הסת לשבועת הדיינין אלא נקיטת חפץ, שאין הנשבע שבועת הסת אוחז ספר תורה אלא משביעין אותו בשם או בכנוי בשבועה או באלה מפיו או מפי בית דין כמו שבועת הדיינין, וכבר נהגו הכל להיות ספר תורה ביד חזן הכנסת או שאר העם בעת שמשביעין שבועת הסת כדי לאיים עליו. 55
14
The judges administer the oath to the person taking it in any language that he understands.35 The Geonim ruled in this manner. My masters, however, ruled that an oath should be administered only in Lashon HaKodesh. This ruling should not be relied upon.36
Although it has become customary to administer oaths in Lashon HaKodesh, the person taking the oath should be familiarized with the matter until he understands the wording of the oath. [The rationale is that] the oath of the judges is a sh'vuat hapikadon itself.37 People have even adopted the custom of administering a sh'vuat heset in Lashon HaKodesh.38
יד
הדיינין שהשביעו את הנשבע בכל לשון שהוא מכיר הרי זו כמצותה וכן הורו הגאונים, אבל רבותינו הורו שאין משביעים אלא בלשון הקדש, ואין ראוי לסמוך על הוראה זו, ואף על פי שנהגו בכל בתי דינין להשבע בלשון הקדש צריך להודיע את הנשבע עד שיהא מכיר לשון השבועה, ששבועת הדיינין היא שבועת הפקדון בעצמה, ואף שבועת הסת נהגו כל העם להשביע אותה בלשון הקדש.
15
Everyone who is obligated to take an oath of the judges that comes about because of a definite claim and denial,39whether it is of Scriptural or Rabbinic origin, is subjected to a admonition, as will be explained.40 Everyone who is obligated to take an oath, whether of Scriptural or Rabbinic origin, because of a doubtful claim need not be subjected to an admonition.41
טו
כל מי שיתחייב שבועת הדיינין שהיא על ידי טענת ודאי וכפירה בין שהיתה מדברי תורה בין שהיתה מדבריהם מאיימין עליו כמו שיתבאר, וכל מי שיתחייב בה בטענת ספק בין מן התורה בין מדבריהם אינו צריך איום.
16
How is an admonition administered to the person taking the oath? We tell him: Know that the entire world trembled at the time the Holy One, blessed be He, told Moses [Exodus 20:7]: "Do not take the name of God, your Lord, in vain." For with regard to all the transgressions in the Torah, as [Exodus 34:7] states: "And He shall cleanse." And with regard to [a false oath,] as [Exodus 20:7] states: "[God] will not cleanse one who takes His name in vain."42
With regard to all the transgressions in the Torah, retribution is exacted from him [alone], but with regard to [a false oath], retribution is exacted from him and from his family who conceal the matter for him.43 Moreover, this causes retribution to be exacted from "the enemies of the Jews,"44 for the entire Jewish people are responsible for each other,45 for [Hoshea 4:2-3] states: "Swearing, denying, murdering.... Therefore the land will mourn and all who inhabit it will be forlorn."
With regard to all the transgressions in the Torah, [retribution] is suspended for two or three generations if he possesses merit, but with regard to [a false oath], retribution is exacted immediately, as [Zechariah 5:4] states: 'I have let loose [the curse],' declares God, the Lord of Hosts, 'It will come into the house of the thief and the house of he who took an oath in My name falsely.'
"I have let loose" implies immediately. "It will come into the house of the thief" - this refers to deceiving people, i.e. one who does not have money owed to him by a colleague and yet lodges a claim against him to require him to take an oath. "He who took an oath in My name falsely" - this should be interpreted literally. [The verse continues:] "It shall destroy it, its wood, and its stones." Entities that cannot be destroyed by fire and water will be destroyed by a false oath.
טז
וכיצד מאיימין על הנשבע, אומרין לו הוי יודע שכל העולם כולו נזדעזע בשעה שאמר הקב"ה למשה לא תשא את שם ה' אלהיך לשוא, וכל עבירות שבתורה נאמר בהן ונקה וכאן נאמר לא ינקה, כל עבירות שבתורה נפרעין ממנו וכאן ממנו וממשפחתו שמחפין על זה, ולא עוד אלא גורם להפרע משונאיהם של ישראל שכל ישראל ערבין זה בזה שנאמר אלה וכחש ורצוח וגו' וכתוב אחריו על כן תאבל הארץ ואמלל כל יושב בה, כל עבירות שבתורה תולין לו שנים ושלשה דורות אם יש לו זכות וכאן נפרעין מיד שנאמר הוצאתיה נאם ה' צבאות ובאה אל בית הגנב ואל בית הנשבע בשמי לשקר, הוצאתיה מיד, ובאה אל בית הגנב זה הגונב דעת הבריות ואין לו ממון על חבירו וטוענו בחנם ומשביעו, אל בית הנשבע בשמי לשקר כמשמעו, וכלתו ואת עציו ואת אבניו דברים שאין אש ומים מכלין אותן שבועת שקר מכלה אותן.
17
The concept [conveyed] by this admonition is told [to the person taking the oath] entirely in a language that they understand, so that they will understand the matter and the sinner will repent and correct [is conduct].
יז
וענין האיום הזה כלו בלשון שהן מכירין אומרים להם כדי שיבינו בדברים ויחזור החוטא למוטב, אמר איני נשבע פוטרין אותו ונותן מה שטענו חבירו, וכן אם אמר הטוען איני משביעו ופטרו הולכין להן.
18
If [the defendant] says: "I will take the oath," and [the plaintiff] persists in the claim, the people there say to each other: "Turn away from the tents of these wicked men."48
[The court] tell [the defendant]: "We are not administering the oath to you according to your understanding, but according to our understanding and the understanding of the court."49
יח
אמר הריני נשבע וחבירו תובע, העומדים שם אומרים זה לזה סורו נא מעל אהלי האנשים הרשעים וגו', ואומרין לו לא על דעתך אנו משביעין אותך אלא על דעתנו ועל דעת בית דין.
19
יט
אע"פ שאין מאיימין איום זה בשבועת טענת ספק כמו שבארנו ולא בשבועת הסת, צריכין הדיינין לפצור בבעלי דינין אולי יחזרו בהן עד שלא תהיה שם שבועה כלל.
20
It is a clear and that anyone who takes an oath of the judges or a sh'vuat heset falsely, is liable for taking a [false] sh'vuat hapikadon, the details of which have already been explained.52 Even though he willfully [took the false oath], he does not receive lashes. [Instead,] he is obligated to pay what he owes plus an additional fifth. [The fifth] is one fourth of the principal, so that the principal and the fifth are equal to five.53 And he must bring a guilt offering if the oath was taken in court, as we explained.54
כ
דבר ברור וגלוי שכל הנשבע שבועת הדיינין או שבועת הסת בשקר שיהא חייב משום שבועת הפקדון שכבר נתבארו משפטיה ואינו לוקה ואע"פ שהוא מזיד ונתחייב לשלם מה שנשבע עליו בתוספת חומש שהוא רביע הקרן עד שיהיה הוא וחומשו חמשה, ומביא קרבן אשם אם יש שם בית (דין) כמו שבארנו. 56.
FOOTNOTES
1.
See Chapter 1, Halachot 7-8.
2.
See Halachah 5 which mentions the oaths required by the court.
3.
See Halachot 8-9.
4.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 7) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 435) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Note the Hasagot of the Ramban to Sefer HaMitzvot and the Ra'avad' objections at the beginning of the Mishneh Torah which differ and argue that this should not be considered as a positive commandment. See also Hilchot Nedarim 1:4 which states that there is a positive Scriptural commandment for a person to carry out an oath or vow he took.
5.
For this reveals the reverence and awe in which God's name is held.
6.
For that implies drawing a certain equation between that other entity and God.
7.
See the Radbaz who explains why the expression: "As God lives and by the life of your soul" (II Kings 2:4, 4:30) is not a contradiction of this principle.
8.
When the Jewish people were compelled by God to accept the Torah by oath. One might think that we would apply the principle (see Chapter 5, Halachah 11, and notes) that one oath does not take effect when another is already in effect. Hence, taking the oath would be taking God's name in vain. This is not so as the Rambam continues to explain.
9.
Thus if David - a paradigm of pious conduct - could take an oath for this purpose, so can others.
10.
In contrast to landed property, servants, and promissory notes (Hilchot To'en V'Nitan 5:1).
11.
This situation is referred to by our Sages with the term modeh bimiktzat: "one who admits a portion." See Hilchot To'en V'Nitan 1:1.
12.
"Whenever [the testimony of] two [witnesses] would require him to make financial restitution, [the testimony of] one [witness] obligates him to take an oath" (Ibid.).
13.
If, however, the plaintiff suspects the defendant is liable, but is unsure of his claim, he cannot require the defendant to take an oath (ibid.:7). Similarly, if the defendant is unsure whether he is liable or not, he may not take a Scriptural oath to absolve himself of responsibility.
The Rambam's statements here are significant in another context. There is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis if a plaintiff who makes a claim that is supported by the testimony of one witness must be certain of the veracity of the claim himself or whether he can be doubtful, but rely on the testimony of the witness. The Maggid Mishneh (in his gloss to Hilchot Gezelah 4:17 and the Kessef Mishneh (in his gloss to Hilchot To'en V'Nitan 3:6) maintain that the Rambam follows the latter view. Here, however, it appears otherwise.
14.
See ibid.:2; Hilchot Sechirut 1:2; 2:8.
15.
The Ma'aseh Rokeach states that the word Shema שמע serves as an acronym for the names of these three oaths: Shomrim, Modeh bimitzat eid echad, שומרים, מודה במקצת, עד אחד
16.
See Hilchot Sechirut 11:6 which explains that when an employer denies owing a worker his wage, the worker may take an oath and collect his due.
17.
See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 14:1.
18.
For example, Sh'vuot 44b mentions several other instances when such an oath is required of a defendant: a person who claims that property was stolen from him and their is substantial circumstantial evidence corroborating his claim (see Hilchot Gezeilah 4:2), a storekeeper who disputes a client's claims with regard to payment (Hilchot Mechirah 20:8).
19.
See Hilchot Shluchim V'Shutafim 9:1.
20.
I.e., in contrast to the oaths mentioned in the previous halachah which were established by the Sages of the Mishnah. Sh'vuot 40b states that this oath was ordained by Rav Nachman, one of the leading Sages in the midst of the era of the Gemara. See Hilchot To'en V'Nitan 1:3.
A defendant is required to take this oath whenever he denies entirely a claim registered against him by a plaintiff.
21.
The Seifer Meirat Einayim 75:16 interprets the term heset as meaning "placed upon," i.e., it is an oath which our Sages placed upon a person. Others interpret it as relating to the root meisit, meaning "entice." The purpose of this oath is to entice a defendant to admit an obligation.
22.
This will impress him with the seriousness of the matter.
23.
The Rama (Choshen Mishpat 87:15) quotes opinions stating that the defendant should not hold the scroll. Instead, it should be placed before him and he should place his hand on it.
24.
I.e., he may not sit. Note, however, Halachot 11-12.
25.
This term is used to refer to Rav Yosef Migash, the Rambam's teacher, and Rav Yitzchak Alfasi, Rav Yosef's teacher.
26.
"The Holy Tongue," i.e., the Hebrew of the Tanach and the Mishnah. With regard to this ruling, see Halachah 14.
27.
The Hagahot Maimoniot quote Rashi (Sh'vuot 38b) who states that it has become customary not to administer oaths using God's name, for the awesomeness of the punishment for taking His name in vain would lay waste to the world. This principle is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 87:19).
28.
He is referring to himself.
29.
See Chapter 2, Halachah 1.
30.
For this is equivalent to a judge making an error in a law explicitly stated in the Mishnah, in which instance the law is that the judgment is revoked (Sh'vuot 38b).
The Rama (Choshen Mishpat 87:15) quoutes an opinion that states that a Torah scroll is not required. Any sacred text with God's name is sufficient. Similarly, in one of the Rambam's responsum, he writes that a Chumash is sufficient.
31.
For Exodus 12:9 says of tefillin: "So that the Torah of God will be in your mouth."
32.
This is a token of respect for him. See Sh'vuot 38b.
The Siftei Cohen 87:41 quotes Rav Hai Gaon who states that the term Torah scholar has been given many definitions, but that employed today is "anyone who puts on tefillin." On this basis, the Siftei Cohen writes that in the present day, there is no difference between Torah scholars and ordinary individuals.
33.
See Halachah 8.
34.
The Ra'avad states that it is not customary to administer a sh'vuat hesit with God's name in the present age, for we fear that people will take false oaths. Hence to reduce the punishment that might be incurred, God's name is not mentioned. To compensate for that omission, the court should employ various techniques to impress the person taking the oath with the seriousness of the matter. As the Radbaz states, his argument with the Rambam appears to be practical, but not theoretical. In the era of the Talmud, the Rambam's ruling would be followed.
Other authorities do not accept the Rambam's view even theoretically. They maintain that even in the era of the Talmud, a sh'vuat heset was not administered with God's name. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 87:18) mentions the Rambam's view, but follows that of the other authorities.
35.
I.e., even languages other than Lashon HaKodesh.
36.
For the Sh'vuot 38b, 39a and the Tosefta, Sotah 7:1 states that an oath can be administered in any language.
37.
And a person is liable for a sh'vuat hapikadon only if he understands what he is saying, as stated in Chapter 7, Halachah 7.
38.
See Halachah 20.
39.
See Halachah 6.
40.
In the following two halachot.
41.
For the prooftext from Zechariah cited in the admonition is speaking about a definite claim. See also Halachah 19.
42.
See also Chapter 12, Halachah 1; Hilchot Teshuvah 1:2.
43.
Sh'vuot 39a derives this concept from Ecclesiates 5:5 which states: "Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin." "Your mouth" refers to taking a false oath and "your flesh" to one's family."
44.
Here the intent is the Jewish people themselves. Our Sages (see Sukkah 29a) use this expression as a euphemism.
45.
The Sefer Meirat Einayim 87:58 notes that this concept applies, not only with regard to a false oath, but to all the transgressions mentioned in the Torah. Nevertheless, there is a stringent aspect that applies with regard to a false oath, for with regard to other transgressions, the interrelation affects one when he has the opportunity to rebuke the transgressor and with regard to a false oath, it applies even when one does not have such an opportunity.
46.
The Sefer Meirat Einayim 87:60 interprets this as meaning that he is sent away from the court. For once he leaves the court, he cannot change his mind and decide to take the oath.
47.
Once the plaintiff has retracted his request for the defendant to take the oath, he is considered to have waived his claim and can no longer prosecute it again. See Hilchot Mechirah 5:1.
48.
This malediction refers to the plaintiff as well. For as Sh'vuot 39b states, the negative repercussions of taking the oath affect them both. The Radbaz explains that the plaintiff shares in the responsibility, for he should have been more careful and not entered into a business arrangement without having the matter observed by witnesses. And if the oath is true, he should have been more careful with his accounts, so as not to require God's name to have been employed for such matters.
The Sefer Meirat Einayim 87:61 explains that when the plaintiff sees that the defendant is prepared to take a false oath, he should have offered a compromise rather than continue to pressure him and thus cause God's name to be taken in vain.
49.
As stated in Chapter 2, Halachah 15-16, this measure is employed so that later, the defendant will not try to absolve himself saying: "I had this-and-this intent in my heart when taking the oath." Since the oath is being administered to him according to the understanding of others, it is their interpretation that is upheld. See Sh'vuot 29a and Nedarim 25a which speak of a defendant employing deception while taking an oath.
50.
Although he does not dispute the Rambam's ruling, the Radbaz questions why an admonition is not administered in these instances. The Meiri and the Sefer Meirat Einayim 87:61 explain that when the plaintiff is making a definite claim, it is one person's word against the other's. Thus there is reason to think that the defendant's oath is false and to prevent him from doing so, we issue this warning. When, however, an oath is taken because of a doubt, the defendant is not being challenged. Hence, there is less reason to suspect that he would take a false oath.
51.
For in all situations, it is preferable that an oath not be taken. For this reason, courts have adopted the policy of trying to negotiate compromises in all litigation (Radbaz).
52.
See Chapters 7 and 8.
53.
I.e., it is one fifth of the new total and not one fifth of the original principal.
54.
Chapter 1, Halachah 9.
The Ra'avad writes that at present since God's name is not mentioned in the oath administered by the judges, there is no liability for a guilt offering or to pay the additional fifth.
55.
אין בין שבועת היסת לשבועת הדיינין אלא נקיטת חפץ וכו' אלא משביעין אותו בשם או בכינוי. א"א שמעתי שתקנו הגאונים שאין משביעין עכשיו לא בשם ולא בכנוי כדי שלא יהא העולם חרב על ידי החוטאים שרבו אלא שמחרימין אותו ומקללים אותו ומחרימין עליו בשופרות וכבוי נרות ומטות כפויות לאיים עליו שאם יחטא לעצמו יחטא.
56.
ואע"פ שהוא מזיד וכו'. א"א אחר שתיקנו הגאונים שאין בשבועתנו לא שם ולא כנוי אין בהם לא חומש ולא אשם שאינן אלא ענין קללות לחוטא.
Shvuot - Chapter 12
1
Although a person who took a false oath or an oath in vain is given lashes,1 and similarly, one who takes a [false] sh'vuat haedut or sh'vuat hapikadon brings a sacrifice,2 they do not receive complete atonement for the sin of taking a [false] oath, as [Exodus 20:7] states: "God will not cleanse [one who takes His name in vain]." He will not be absolved from the judgment of heaven until he receives retribution for his desecration of [His] great name, as [Leviticus 19:12] states: "[You shall not take a false oath in My name, for] you will desecrate the name of Your God." Therefore a person must be very careful with regard to this sin, more than with regard all other sins.3
א
אף על פי שלוקה הנשבע לשוא או לשקר וכן הנשבע שבועת העדות או שבועת הפקדון מביא קרבן, אין מתכפר להן עון השבועה כלו שנאמר לא ינקה ה' אין לזה נקיון מדין שמים עד שיתפרע ממנו על השם הגדול שחלל, שנאמר וחללת את שם ה' אלהיך אני ה', לפיכך צריך אדם להזהר מעון זה יותר מכל העבירות. 38
2
This sin is considered one of the severe transgressions, as explained in Hilchot Teshuvah.4 Although it does not involve kerait or execution by the court, it involves the desecration of [God's] holy name which is more severe than all other sins.
ב
עון זה מן החמורות הוא כמו שבארנו בהלכות תשובה, אף על פי שאין בו לא כרת ולא מיתת בית דין יש בו חלול השם המקודש שהוא גדול מכל העונות.
3
When a person takes an oath by the heaven and earth, by the sun, or the like, this is not an oath,5 even though his intent is He who created them. Similarly, one who takes an oath by one of the prophets or by one of the texts of the Holy Scriptures, this is not an oath, even if his intent is He who sent the prophet or gave the commandments in this text.6
Although these are not oaths, those who take them are subjected to a severe warning and we teach the people not to act frivolously in this manner. [Indeed,] we make it look as if these are oaths and give them an opening [to ask for their absolution] and absolve them.7
ג
מי שנשבע בשמים ובארץ ובשמש וכיוצא בהן אע"פ שאין כוונתו אלא למי שבראם אין זו שבועה, וכן הנשבע בנביא מן הנביאים או בכתב מכתבי הקדש אע"פ שאין כוונתו אלא למי ששלח נביא זה או למי שצוה בכתב זה אין זו שבועה, ואע"פ שאין אלו שבועות מאיימין עליהן ומלמדין את העם שלא ינהגו קלות ראש בכך ומראין בעיניהם שזו שבועה, ופותחין להם פתח ומתירין להם. 39
4
When does the above apply? With regard to other holy texts. [Different rules apply,] however, when one takes an oath by the Torah.8 If one takes an oath by what is written in [the Torah],9his intent is by the names of God [it contains].10If one takes an oath by it without any further definition, his intent is on the parchment [of the scroll] and it is not considered as an oath.11 If he took [the scroll] in his hand and took an oath by it,12 it is as if he took an oath by what was written in it and [the matter] is forbidden.13
ד
בד"א בשאר כתבי הקדש, אבל הנשבע בתורה, אם נשבע במה שכתוב בה דעתו על ההזכרות, ואם נשבע בה סתם דעתו על הגויל ואין כאן שבועה, נטלה בידו ונשבע בה הרי זה כמי שנשבע במה שכתוב בה ואסור. 40
5
[The following rules apply when] a person takes an oath by the Torah without any further definition. If he is a Torah scholar, he does not need to be released by a sage.14 If he is a common person,15 it is necessary that he asked to be released by a sage so that he will not treat oaths frivolously.16
ה
והנשבע בתורה סתם אם תלמיד חכם הוא אינו צריך שאלה לחכם, ואם עם הארץ הוא צריך שאלה לחכם כדי שלא ינהג קלות ראש בשבועות.
6
When a servant takes an oath, his master does not have to compel him [to break the oath to nullify it].17 Instead, his [status] is the same after taking the oath as it was before he did so.18 [The rationale is that] his body is not his property for that the oath he takes will be effective. With regard to oaths, [Numbers 30:3] states: "To 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. Thus [a servant's taking an oath] is comparable to taking an oath regarding someone else's property.19
ו
עבד שנשבע אין רבו צריך לכפותו, והרי הוא אחר שנשבע כקודם שנשבע, לפי שאין גופו קנוי לו כדי שתחול עליו שבועתו ונאמר בשבועות לאסור אסר על נפשו מי שנפשו ברשותו יצא עבד שהוא ברשות אחרים, ונמצא זה כמו שנשבע על נכסי אחר. 41
7
[Even though] minors20 understand the significance of an oath take an oath, they are not obligated [to maintain their commitment].21 [Nevertheless,] we compel them to uphold their word to train them [in the observance of mitzvot] and to impress them with fear so that they do not act frivolously with regard to oaths. If the matter concerning which they took the oath is such that a minor could not maintain without suffering injury,22 e.g., he took an oath that he would fast or that he would not eat meat for a long time, his father or his teacher should beat him and rebuke him, and create the appearance that his oath [took effect, but] was released, so that he will not be habituated to treat oaths frivolously.
ז
קטנים שנשבעו והן יודעין טעם השבועה אע"פ שאינן חייבין, כופין אותן לעמוד בדבריהן, כדי לחנכן ולאיים עליהם כדי שלא ינהגו קלות ראש בשבועות, ואם היה הדבר שנשבעו עליו דבר שאין הקטן יכול לעמוד בו אלא אם כן ניזק, כגון שנשבע שיצום או שלא יאכל בשר זמן מרובה, מכה אותו אביו או רבו וגוער בו ומראין לו שהותר שבועתו כדי שלא יהיה רגיל להקל ראש בשבועות.
8
We must be very careful with children and train them to speak words of truth without [resorting to] an oath so that they will not be habituate to swear at all times like gentiles do. This matter is tantamount to an obligation for their parents and for those who teach young children.
ח
צריך להזהר בקטנים הרבה וללמד לשונם דברי אמת בלא שבועה כדי שלא יהיו רגילים להשבע תמיד כעכו"ם, וזה הדבר כמו חובה על אבותיהם ועל מלמדי תינוקות.
9
When one hears a colleague mention God's name in vain, take a false oath in his presence, or recite a blessing that is unnecessary in which instance [his colleague] transgresses23because he takes God's name in vain,24 as we explained in Hilchot Berachot,25 he must place him under a ban of ostracism.26If he does not, he himself should be ostracized. The ban should, however, be lifted immediately so that it will not present an obstacle to others, for they will not know that he was placed under a ban. And if one would say, "Make it known that he [is under ostracism]," the entire populace will be under ban for [people] have already habituated their tongues to iniquity27 and oaths at all times.
ט
השומע הזכרת השם מפי חבירו לשוא או שנשבע לפניו לשקר או שבירך ברכה שאינה צריכה שהוא עובר משום נושא שם ה' לשוא כמו שבארנו בהלכות ברכות הרי זה חייב לנדותו, ואם לא נדהו הוא בעצמו יהא בנדוי, וצריך להתיר אותו מיד כדי שלא יהא מכשול לאחרים שהרי אינו יודע שנדוהו, ואם תאמר יודיעו נמצאו כל העולם בנידוי שהרי למדו לשונם העוה ושבועה תמיד.
10
When does the above apply? When the person taking this oath or reciting this blessing in vain does so intentionally? If, however, he does so inadvertently or does not know that this is forbidden,28 [a listener] is not obligated to place him under a ban of ostracism. Indeed, I maintain that it is forbidden to place him under a ban of ostracism, for the Torah did not [prescribe] punishment for an inadvertent transgressor. Instead, one should caution him and warn him not to repeat [the transgression].
י
במה דברים אמורים בשהיה הנשבע הזה או המברך לבטלה מזיד, אבל אם היה שוגג ולא ידע שזה אסור אינו חייב לנדותו, ואני אומר שאסור לנדותו שלא ענש הכתוב שוגג אלא מזהירו ומתרה בו שלא יחזור.
11
It is not only a false oath that is forbidden. Instead, it is forbidden to mention even one of the names designated for God29 although one does not take an oath. For the verse [Deuteronomy 28:58] commands us, saying: "to fear the glorious and awesome name."30 Included in fearing it is not to mention it in vain.31
Therefore if because of a slip of the tongue, one mentions [God's] name in vain, he should immediately hurry to praise, glorify, and venerate it so that it will not have been mentioned [entirely] in vain. What is implied? If he mentions God's name, he should say: "Blessed be He for all eternity," "He is great and exceedingly praiseworthy,"32 or the like so that it will not have been [mentioned entirely] in vain.
יא
ולא שבועה לשוא בלבד היא שאסורה אלא אפילו להזכיר שם מן השמות המיוחדין לבטלה אסור ואע"פ שלא נשבע, שהרי הכתוב מצוה ואומר ליראה את השם הנכבד והנורא, ובכלל יראתו שלא יזכירו לבטלה, לפיכך אם טעה הלשון והוציא שם לבטלה ימהר מיד וישבח ויפאר ויהדר לו כדי שלא יזכר לבטלה, כיצד אמר ה' אומר ברוך הוא לעולם ועד או גדול הוא ומהולל מאד וכיוצא בזה כדי שלא יהא לבטלה.
12
It is permitted to approach [a sage] to have an oath released as we explained33 and there is no fault [in doing so]. [Indeed,] one who has hesitations about the matter is [showing] traces of heresy.34 Nevertheless, it is appropriate to show care in this regard. One should not respond [to a request] to release [an oath] unless it involves a matter concerning a mitzvah or a great need.35 It is of great benefit for a person never to take an oath at all.36If, however, one transgressed and took an oath, he should endure great difficulty and keep his oath,37 as [Psalms 15:4-5] states: "One who takes an oath to his own detriment and does not nullify it..., he who acts in this manner will never falter."
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
יב
אע"פ שמותר להשאל על השבועה כמו שבארנו ואין בזה דופי, ומי שלבו נוקפו בדבר זה אינו אלא שמץ מינות, אעפ"כ ראוי להזהר בדבר זה, ואין נזקקין להתיר אלא מפני דבר מצוה או מפני צורך גדול, וטובה גדולה היא לאדם שלא ישבע כלל, ואם עבר ונשבע שיצטער ויעמוד בשבועתו שנאמר נשבע להרע ולא ימיר וכתוב אחריו עושה אלה לא ימוט לעולם. 42 סליקו להו הלכות שבועות בס"ד.
FOOTNOTES
1.
Chapter 1, Halachot 3,7.
2.
But are not subjected to lashes, Chapter 1, Halachah 8.
3.
See Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 5:10.
The Ra'avad differs and maintains that lashes are sufficient to atone for a person's sin entirely. The Radbaz explains that the sin of taking a false oath is two dimensional, involving not only the particular transgression of taking a false oath, but also the desecration of God's name. The lashes atone for the particular transgression of the false oath, but not for the desecration of God's name. That requires more severe retribution as the Rambam explains.
4.
Hilchot Teshuvah 1:2.
5.
The Ra'avad states that although one is not liable for a sacrifice or lashes for such an oath, it is forbidden to take such an oath. At first, the Kessef Mishneh states that it is possible that this is also the Rambam's intent, but afterwards, states that the Rambam's wording implies that such statements are not considered oaths at all.
The Radbaz writes (and this understanding is borne out by one of the Rambam's responsa) that according to the Rambam, such an oath is not binding and need not be released. The Ra'avad differs and maintains that such oaths must be released and if they are false, one transgresses the prohibition against taking a false oath. See also the notes to the following halachah.
6.
See the following halachah and notes.
7.
See Chapter 6, Halachah 10; Hilchot Nedarim 2:12.
8.
The Ra'avad differs with this principle, maintaining that there is no difference between the Torah and the other books of the Holy Scriptures with regard to their fundamental holiness. Thus a person who takes an oath by the contents of any of the other books of the Bible is also liable.
The difference between these two understandings depends on whether one understands the passage from Nedarim 14b as referring to only vows (as is explicitly stated, and as is the Ra'avad's understanding) or as apply also to oaths (as the Rambam maintains). The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 212:1) quotes the Rambam's view.
9.
I.e., he states that explicitly.
10.
In which instance the person is liable for taking an oath, as stated in Chapter 2, Halachah 2.
11.
For he is not taking an oath by God's name.
12.
The Chatam Sofer (in his commentary to Nedarim 14b) states that the Rambam is referring to an instance where the person specifically picked up the Torah scroll for the purpose of taking an oath. Otherwise, even if he was holding the scroll in his hand before taking the oath, this law would not apply. Rashi understands the passage differently.
13.
For by taking the Torah scroll in his hand, the person is implying that he is considering the matter with the seriousness of an oath (Nimukei Yosef).
14.
For he knows the distinction mentioned in the previous halachah and thus understands that the oath is not effective and does not intend for it to be binding. Note, however, the Beit Yosef (Yoreh De'ah 212) who severely criticizes scholars who take an oath by the Torah, knowing that it is not effective to deceive the people to whom they are taking the oath.
15.
Who does not know the above distinction.
16.
As explained in Halachah 3.
17.
Note the contrast to the law that applies when a servant takes a Nazirite vow (Hilchot Nazirut 2:7).
18.
The Ra'avad, however, maintains that the Rambam's ruling applies only to oaths that will affect the servant's capacity to work. If that is not the case, the oath can take effect. As the Rambam writes in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Nazirut 9:1), there is a difference between vows and oaths in this regard. The Ra'avad's statement will apply with regard to vows, but not to oaths (Or Sameach).
19.
Which is not effective as stated in Nedarim 47a. See also Chapter 5, Halachah 1.
20.
Boys under 12 and girls under 11. See Hilchot Nedarim 11:1.
21.
For they are not liable for any of the Torah's commandments.
22.
The Radbaz explains that we are not speaking about a person in mortal danger, for that would apply with regard to an adult as well. Instead, the intent is aggravation or sickness.
23.
The commentaries question whether the Rambam's intent is that he has transgressed a Scriptural commandment or merely a Rabbinic one. The Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 30) states that the transgression is Scriptural in origin and the violator should be punished by lashing. This opinion is also mentioned by the Magen Avraham 215:6. From the Kessef Mishneh to Hilchot Milah 3:6, it appears that even the Rambam would consider the prohibition as Rabbinic in nature. The latter understanding is shared by many other Rishonim. Their position is - as explained by the Shulchan Aruch HaRav 215:3 - since he is reciting a blessing, his mention of God's name is not entirely frivolous.
24.
See the gloss of Rabbi Akiva Eiger who questions the Rambam's statements, based on the ruling that a person who is unsure whether or not he recited the Grace After Meals must recite the blessing again. Seemingly, the recitation of that blessing would be problematic, because there is a doubt whether or not he is required to do so or not. Thus it is possible that he is transgressing a Scriptural commandment.
In resolution, Rabbi Akiva Eiger explains that since the person is obligated to recite the blessing, even if that obligation stems from a doubt, he is not considered to be taking God's name in vain.
25.
Chapter 1, Halachah 15.
26.
See the concluding chapters of Hilchot Talmud Torah for a description of the implications of this ban.
27.
Cf. Jeremiah 9:4.
28.
The Turei Zahav 334:18 mentions that the Rambam's view is more lenient than that of the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol who maintains that this leniency applies only when one does not know of the prohibition at all. According to his view, one who knows of the prohibition, but accidentally recites a blessing in vain must be placed under ban.
29.
I.e., the seven names for God mentioned in Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah, ch. 6.
30.
See Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 4) which quotes Sanhedrin 56a and Temurah 4a as deriving this concept from another prooftext (Deuteronomy 6:13).
31.
For one does not treat something that is truly revered with such carelessness.
32.
See Hilchot Berachot 4:10 which states that when a person recites a blessing in vain, he should say Baruch shem kevod malchuto leolam va'ed, "Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom forever."
33.
Chapter 6, Halachah 1.
34.
For this indicates that he does not accept the Oral Tradition that Moses communicated. For the release of vows is not explicitly stated in the Torah, but instead communicated by the Oral Tradition, as stated above.
35.
See Chapter 6, Halachot 9-10 which gives examples of such situations.
36.
For it is possible that unwittingly, he could take a false oath and thus bring severe retribution upon himself and others. See Gittin 35a which explains how a woman unknowingly took a false oath and caused one of her sons to die.
37.
See Hilchot Nedarim 1:4 which states that keeping an oath or a vow fulfills a Scriptural mitzvah. Nevertheless, there is a difference between oaths and vows. As the Ra'avad (see also Hilchot Nedarim 13:25) mentions, it is desirable to have vows released. Oaths, by contrast, should be observed and not released.
38.
אע"פ שלוקה הנשבע לשוא. א"א והרי אמרו על שבועת שוא ועל כיוצא בה ב"ד של מעלה אין מנקין אותו אבל ב"ד של מטה מלקין אותו ומנקין אותו והרי חייבי מיתות ב"ד מתודין ומתכפר להן ומלקות תחת מיתה עומדת.
39.
מי שנשבע בשמים ובארץ אף על פי שאין כוונתו אלא למי שבראם אין זו שבועה. א"א ליחייב עליה קרבן ומלקות. /השגת הראב"ד/ ומלמדין את העם שלא ינהגו קלות ראש בכך. א"א באמת צריכין שאלה לחכם ועובר משום בל יחל.
40.
בד"א בשאר כתבי הקדש. א"א כמה אני תמה על המחבר הזה מה ראה לחלק בין תורה לשאר כתבי הקדש ואם יש ביניהם לענין בני העיר שמכרו תורה לא יקחו ספרים ולענין מניחין ס"ת ע"ג ספרים אבל לענין קדושה הכל קדוש ומצילין אותן בשבת מפני הדליקה וטעונין גניזה ומטמאין את הידים וקדושים הם לכל דבר כתורה והנשבע בהם ומשקר כמשקר במי שצוה אותן, והריני מודיע שאין הענין הזה כמו שהוא סובר שלא על הנשבע בתורה קאמר אלא על המתפיס בס"ת שאם אמר ככר זו עלי כספר התורה הזה אם מנחא אארעא לא אמר כלום דדעתיה אגוילים וגוילים אין בהם קדושה אלא בשביל האותיות שעליהן הילכך אין כאן התפסה אבל אי נקיט ליה בידיה דעתיה אהזכרות שבו ואזכרות כדבר הנדור הוא שעל ידי הכתיבה והכוונה לשם קדושה הם קדושות וכ"ש אם אמר במה שבתוכה שהיא התפסה ואע"ג דמנחא אארעא, ובירושלמי מפורש בתורה הרי זה מותר כקדושת התורה כלומר ואין זה כדבר המקודש בידי אדם, ככתוב בה הרי זה אסור דקדושה כתוב בה כלומר שהם מקודשים ע"י אדם וכוונתו לקדושה.
41.
עבד שנשבע וכו'. א"א פירוש אם נשבע שיתענה אינו צריך לכפותו שיאכל לפי שלא חל עליו הנדר שנאמר להרע או להיטיב מה הטבה רשות וכו' יצא זה ששבועתו להרע לרבו אבל אם נדר בנזיר צריך שיאמר לו רבו שתה.
42.
ואם עבר ונשבע שיצטער ויעמוד. א"א דוקא בשבועה ושנשבע להרע לעצמו אבל נודר בנדר אפילו להרע לעצמו מצוה להתירו שהרי אמרו הנודר כאילו בנה במה והמקיימו כאילו הקריב עליו קרבן.
• Tuesday, 11 Shevat, 5777 · 7 February 2017
• "Today's Day"
• Sunday, Sh'vat 11, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: B'shalach, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 60-65.
Tanya: Ch. 20. It is well known (p. 83)...null and void. (p. 85).
The routine of the day begins with saying modeh ani (Siddur Tehilat HaShem p. 6, "I acknowledge before You, living and eternal King etc..."). This is said before the morning laving of the hands, even while the hands are "impure." The reason is that all the impurites in the world do not defile a Jew's "I acknowledge." He might lack one thing or another, but his modeh ani1 remains intact.
FOOTNOTES
1.See "On the Essence of Chassidus, Kehot.
• Daily Thought:
The Tzaddik
The tzaddik is one with G‑d.
We recognize him because within each of us
is also a tzaddik
who is one with G‑d.
Inside each of us is a spark of Moses.
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment