Torah Reading Tazria: Leviticus 12:1 Adonai said to Moshe, 2 “Tell the people of Isra’el: ‘If a woman conceives and gives birth to a boy, she will be unclean for seven days with the same uncleanness as in niddah, when she is having her menstrual period. 3 On the eighth day, the baby’s foreskin is to be circumcised. 4 She is to wait an additional thirty-three days to be purified from her blood; she is not to touch any holy thing or come into the sanctuary until the time of her purification is over. 5 But if she gives birth to a girl, she will be unclean for two weeks, as in her niddah; and she is to wait another sixty-six days to be purified from her blood.
6 “‘When the days of her purification are over, whether for a son or for a daughter, she is to bring a lamb in its first year for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or dove for a sin offering to the entrance of the tent of meeting, to the cohen. 7 He will offer it before Adonai and make atonement for her; thus she will be purified from her discharge of blood. Such is the law for a woman who gives birth, whether to a boy or to a girl. 8 If she can’t afford a lamb, she is to take two doves or two young pigeons, the one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering; the cohen will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”
13:1 Adonai said to Moshe and Aharon, 2 “If someone develops on his skin a swelling, scab or bright spot which could develop into the disease tzara‘at, he is to be brought to Aharon the cohen or to one of his sons who are cohanim. 3 The cohen is to examine the sore on his skin; if the hair in the sore has turned white, and the sore appears to go deep into the skin, it is tzara‘at, and after examining him the cohen is to declare him unclean. 4 If the bright spot on his skin is white, but it does not appear to go deep into the skin, and its hair has not turned white, then the cohen is to isolate him for seven days. 5 On the seventh day the cohen is to examine him again, and if the sore appears the same as before and has not spread on the skin, then the cohen is to isolate him for seven more days.
Today in Judaism
Today is: Monday, Nissan 28, 5777 · April 24, 2017
Omer: Day 13 - Yesod sheb'Gevurah
Today's Laws & Customs
• Count "Fourteen Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the fourteenth day of the Omer Count. Since, on the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall of the previous evening, we count the omer for tomorrow's date tonight, after nightfall: "Today is fourteen days, which are two weeks, to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day is Shavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Malchut sheb'Gevurah -- "Receptiveness in Restraint"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" -- Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed, Gevurah, Tifferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
Today in Jewish History
• Jericho's Wall Collapses (1273 BCE)
On the seventh day of the encirclement of Jericho (see Jewish History for the 22nd of Nissan), the Jews, accompanied by the Holy Ark, circled the city seven times. After the blowing of the shofar, the walls miraculously crashed and sank, leaving the city open and unprotected. Jericho was easily conquered, becoming the first fortified Canaanite city to fall to the Children of Israel in their conquest of the Promised Land.
Links:Joshua chapter six with commentary
Crossing the Jordan
• Buchenwald Liberated by American Forces (1945)
The Buchenwald concentration camp was founded in 1937 near the town of Weimar, Germany. Approximately 250,000 prisoners were incarcerated in this camp until its liberation in 1945.
Weimar is a German city known for its highly cultured citizenry. It was the home of many of the upper class intellectual members of Europe’s society. Among others, Goethe, Schiller, Franz Liszt, and Bach lived in Weimar.
Though technically not an extermination camp, approximately 56,000 prisoners were murdered in Buchenwald (not including many others who died after being transferred to other extermination camps). They died from vicious medical experiments, summary executions, torture, beatings, starvation, and inhuman work conditions. The camp was also known for its brutality. German officers would force inmates to eat their meager soup ration off the mud on the ground; would keep them standing in the cold until they froze to death; and they would even use skin of dead inmates to make lamp shades.
On the 29th of Nissan 1945 the Sixth Armored Division of the United States Third Army liberated the camp.
Among the more famous inmates who spent time in Buchenwald are Rabbi Israel Meir Lau, former Chief Rabbi of Israel, and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel.
Links:The Holocaust
Ethics Based on Torah
• Rebbe's Call (1991)
On the eve of Nissan 28, 5751 (April 11, 1991), the Lubavitcher Rebbe issued an emotional call to his followers, and to the world Jewish community, to increase their efforts to bring Moshiach and the ultimate redemption. Spoken in an anguished voice and couched in uncharacteristically personal terms, the Rebbe's words deeply shocked the Chassidim present in the Rebbe's synagogue and reverberated worldwide. "How is it that the Redemption has not yet been attained?" the Rebbe cried. "That despite all that has transpired and all that has been done, Moshiach has still not come? What more can I do? I have done all I can to bring the world to truly demand and clamor for the Redemption...The only thing that remains for me to do is to give over the matter to you. Do all that is in your power to achieve this thing--a most sublime and transcendent light that needs to be brought down into our world with pragmatic tools... I have done all I can. I give it over to you. Do all that you can to bring the righteous redeemer, immediately! I have done my part. From this point on, all is in your hands..."
Links:Transmission
Moshiach: an Anthology
Moshiach and the Future Redemption
Daily Quote
If a person drops a sela, and a poor man finds it and is sustained by it, then he [who lost the coin] will be blessed on its account - Midrash Sifri
Daily Study
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tazria-Metzora, 2nd Portion Leviticus 13:24-13:39 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class
Today is: Monday, Nissan 28, 5777 · April 24, 2017
Omer: Day 13 - Yesod sheb'Gevurah
Today's Laws & Customs
• Count "Fourteen Days to the Omer" Tonight
Tomorrow is the fourteenth day of the Omer Count. Since, on the Jewish calendar, the day begins at nightfall of the previous evening, we count the omer for tomorrow's date tonight, after nightfall: "Today is fourteen days, which are two weeks, to the Omer." (If you miss the count tonight, you can count the omer all day tomorrow, but without the preceding blessing).
The 49-day "Counting of the Omer" retraces our ancestors' seven-week spiritual journey from the Exodus to Sinai. Each evening we recite a special blessing and count the days and weeks that have passed since the Omer; the 50th day is Shavuot, the festival celebrating the Giving of the Torah at Sinai.
Tonight's Sefirah: Malchut sheb'Gevurah -- "Receptiveness in Restraint"
The teachings of Kabbalah explain that there are seven "Divine Attributes" -- Sefirot -- that G-d assumes through which to relate to our existence: Chessed, Gevurah, Tifferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Malchut ("Love", "Strength", "Beauty", "Victory", "Splendor", "Foundation" and "Sovereignty"). In the human being, created in the "image of G-d," the seven sefirot are mirrored in the seven "emotional attributes" of the human soul: Kindness, Restraint, Harmony, Ambition, Humility, Connection and Receptiveness. Each of the seven attributes contain elements of all seven--i.e., "Kindness in Kindness", "Restraint in Kindness", "Harmony in Kindness", etc.--making for a total of forty-nine traits. The 49-day Omer Count is thus a 49-step process of self-refinement, with each day devoted to the "rectification" and perfection of one the forty-nine "sefirot."
Links:How to count the Omer
The deeper significance of the Omer Count
Today in Jewish History
• Jericho's Wall Collapses (1273 BCE)
On the seventh day of the encirclement of Jericho (see Jewish History for the 22nd of Nissan), the Jews, accompanied by the Holy Ark, circled the city seven times. After the blowing of the shofar, the walls miraculously crashed and sank, leaving the city open and unprotected. Jericho was easily conquered, becoming the first fortified Canaanite city to fall to the Children of Israel in their conquest of the Promised Land.
Links:Joshua chapter six with commentary
Crossing the Jordan
• Buchenwald Liberated by American Forces (1945)
The Buchenwald concentration camp was founded in 1937 near the town of Weimar, Germany. Approximately 250,000 prisoners were incarcerated in this camp until its liberation in 1945.
Weimar is a German city known for its highly cultured citizenry. It was the home of many of the upper class intellectual members of Europe’s society. Among others, Goethe, Schiller, Franz Liszt, and Bach lived in Weimar.
Though technically not an extermination camp, approximately 56,000 prisoners were murdered in Buchenwald (not including many others who died after being transferred to other extermination camps). They died from vicious medical experiments, summary executions, torture, beatings, starvation, and inhuman work conditions. The camp was also known for its brutality. German officers would force inmates to eat their meager soup ration off the mud on the ground; would keep them standing in the cold until they froze to death; and they would even use skin of dead inmates to make lamp shades.
On the 29th of Nissan 1945 the Sixth Armored Division of the United States Third Army liberated the camp.
Among the more famous inmates who spent time in Buchenwald are Rabbi Israel Meir Lau, former Chief Rabbi of Israel, and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel.
Links:The Holocaust
Ethics Based on Torah
• Rebbe's Call (1991)
On the eve of Nissan 28, 5751 (April 11, 1991), the Lubavitcher Rebbe issued an emotional call to his followers, and to the world Jewish community, to increase their efforts to bring Moshiach and the ultimate redemption. Spoken in an anguished voice and couched in uncharacteristically personal terms, the Rebbe's words deeply shocked the Chassidim present in the Rebbe's synagogue and reverberated worldwide. "How is it that the Redemption has not yet been attained?" the Rebbe cried. "That despite all that has transpired and all that has been done, Moshiach has still not come? What more can I do? I have done all I can to bring the world to truly demand and clamor for the Redemption...The only thing that remains for me to do is to give over the matter to you. Do all that is in your power to achieve this thing--a most sublime and transcendent light that needs to be brought down into our world with pragmatic tools... I have done all I can. I give it over to you. Do all that you can to bring the righteous redeemer, immediately! I have done my part. From this point on, all is in your hands..."
Links:Transmission
Moshiach: an Anthology
Moshiach and the Future Redemption
Daily Quote
If a person drops a sela, and a poor man finds it and is sustained by it, then he [who lost the coin] will be blessed on its account - Midrash Sifri
Daily Study
Chitas and Rambam for today:
Chumash: Tazria-Metzora, 2nd Portion Leviticus 13:24-13:39 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation | Video Class
Leviticus Chapter 13
Tehillim: Chapters 135 - 139
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 135
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Name of the Lord; offer praise, you servants of the Lord-
2. who stand in the House of the Lord, in the courtyards of the House of our God.
3. Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good; sing to His Name, for He is pleasant.
4. For God has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel as His beloved treasure.
5. For I know that the Lord is great, our Master is greater than all supernal beings.
6. All that the Lord desired He has done, in the heavens and on earth, in the seas and the depths.
7. He causes mists to rise from the ends of the earth; He makes lightning for the rain; He brings forth the wind from His vaults.
8. It was He who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, of man and beast.
9. He sent signs and wonders into the midst of Egypt, on Pharaoh and on all his servants.
10. It was He who struck down many nations, and slew mighty kings:
11. Sichon, king of the Amorites; Og, king of Bashan; and all the kingdoms of Canaan.
12. And He gave their lands as a heritage, a heritage to His people Israel.
13. Lord, Your Name is forever; Lord, Your remembrance is throughout all generations.
14. Indeed, the Lord will judge on behalf of His people, and have compassion on His servants.
15. The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the product of human hands.
16. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
17. they have ears, but cannot hear; nor is there breath in their mouth.
18. Like them will their makers become-all who trust in them.
19. House of Israel, bless the Lord; House of Aaron, bless the Lord;
20. House of Levi, bless the Lord; you who fear the Lord, bless the Lord.
21. Blessed is the Lord from Zion, who dwells in Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!Chapter 136
This psalm contains twenty-six verses, corresponding to the twenty-six generations between the creation of the world and the giving of the Torah.
1. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is forever.
2. Praise the God of the supernal beings, for His kindness is forever.
3. Praise the Master of the heavenly hosts, for His kindness is forever.
4. Who alone performs great wonders, for His kindness is forever.
5. Who makes the heavens with understanding, for His kindness is forever.
6. Who spreads forth the earth above the waters, for His kindness is forever.
7. Who makes the great lights, for His kindness is forever.
8. The sun to rule by day, for His kindness is forever.
9. The moon and stars to rule by night, for His kindness is forever.
10. Who struck Egypt through its firstborn, for His kindness is forever.
11. And brought Israel out of their midst, for His kindness is forever.
12. With a strong hand and with an outstretched arm, for His kindness is forever.
13. Who split the Sea of Reeds into sections, for His kindness is forever.
14. And brought Israel across it, for His kindness is forever.
15. And cast Pharaoh and his army into the Sea of Reeds, for His kindness is forever.
16. Who led His people through the desert, for His kindness is forever;
17. Who struck down great kings, for His kindness is forever.
18. And slew mighty kings, for His kindness is forever.
19. Sichon, king of the Amorites, for His kindness is forever.
20. And Og, king of Bashan, for His kindness is forever.
21. And gave their land as a heritage, for His kindness is forever.
22. A heritage to Israel His servant, for His kindness is forever.
23. Who remembered us in our humiliation, for His kindness is forever.
24. And redeemed us from our oppressors, for His kindness is forever.
25. Who gives food to all flesh, for His kindness is forever.
26. Praise the God of heaven, for His kindness is forever.Chapter 137
Referring to the time of the destruction of the Temple, this psalm tells of when Nebuchadnezzar would ask the Levites to sing in captivity as they had in the Temple, to which they would reply, "How can we sing the song of God upon alien soil?" They were then comforted by Divine inspiration.
1. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat and wept as we remembered Zion.
2. There, upon the willows, we hung our harps.
3. For there our captors demanded of us songs, and those who scorned us-rejoicing, [saying,] "Sing to us of the songs of Zion.”
4. How can we sing the song of the Lord on alien soil?
5. If I forget you, Jerusalem, let my right hand forget [its dexterity].
6. Let my tongue cleave to my palate if I will not remember you, if I will not bring to mind Jerusalem during my greatest joy!
7. Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites the day of [the destruction of] Jerusalem, when they said, "Raze it, raze it to its very foundation!”
8. O Babylon, who is destined to be laid waste, happy is he who will repay you in retribution for what you have inflicted on us.
9. Happy is he who will seize and crush your infants against the rock!Chapter 138
David offers awesome praises to God for His kindness to him, and for fulfilling His promise to grant him kingship.
1. By David. I will thank You with all my heart, in the presence of princes I shall praise You.
2. I will bow toward Your Holy Sanctuary, and praise Your Name for Your kindness and for Your truth; for You have exalted Your word above all Your Names.
3. On the day that I called out You answered me, You emboldened me, [You put] strength in my soul.
4. Lord, all the kings of the land will give thanks to You when they hear the words of Your mouth.
5. And they will sing of the Lord's ways, for the glory of the Lord is great.
6. For though the Lord is exalted, He sees the lowly; the High One castigates from afar.
7. If I walk in the midst of distress, keep me alive; against the wrath of my enemies stretch out Your hand, and let Your right hand deliver me.
8. Lord, complete [Your kindness] on my behalf. Lord, Your kindness is forever, do not forsake the work of Your hands.Chapter 139
A most prominent psalm that guides man in the ways of God as no other in all of the five books of Tehillim. Fortunate is he who recites it daily.
1. For the Conductor, by David, a psalm. O Lord, You have probed me, and You know.
2. You know my sitting down and my standing up; You perceive my thought from afar.
3. You encircle my going about and my lying down; You are familiar with all my paths.
4. For there was not yet a word on my tongue-and behold, Lord, You knew it all.
5. You have besieged me front and back, You have laid Your hand upon me.
6. Knowledge [to escape You] is beyond me; it is exalted, I cannot know it.
7. Where can I go [to escape] Your spirit? And where can I flee from Your presence?
8. If I ascend to the heavens, You are there; if I make my bed in the grave, behold, You are there.
9. Were I to take up wings as the dawn and dwell in the furthest part of the sea,
10. there, too, Your hand would guide me; Your right hand would hold me.
11. Were I to say, "Surely the darkness will shadow me," then the night would be as light around me.
12. Even the darkness obscures nothing from You; and the night shines like the day-the darkness is as light.
13. For You created my mind; You covered me in my mother's womb.
14. I will thank You, for I was formed in an awesome and wondrous way; unfathomable are Your works, though my soul perceives much.
15. My essence was not hidden from You even while I was born in concealment, formed in the depths of the earth.
16. Your eyes beheld my raw form; all [happenings] are inscribed in Your book, even those to be formed in future days-to Him they are the same.
17. How precious are Your thoughts to me, O God! How overwhelming, [even] their beginnings!
18. Were I to count them, they would outnumber the sand, even if I were to remain awake and always with You.
19. O that You would slay the wicked, O God, and men of blood [to whom I say], "Depart from me!”
20. They exalt You for wicked schemes, Your enemies raise [You] for falsehood.
21. Indeed, I hate those who hate You, Lord; I contend with those who rise up against You.
22. I hate them with the utmost hatred; I regard them as my own enemies.
23. Search me, Lord, and know my heart; test me and know my thoughts.
24. See if there is a vexing way in me, then lead me in the way of the world.Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 42
• English Text: Lessons in Tanya
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
• Sefer Hamitzvos:English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Negative Commandment 144
Proper Consumption of the Firstborn Sacrifice
"You may not eat within your gates...and the firstborn of your cattle"—Deuteronomy 12:17.
It is forbidden for a priest to eat an unblemished firstborn animal outside of Jerusalem. In addition, it is forbidden for a non-priest to eat of a non-blemished firstborn animal, regardless of the location.Full text of this Mitzvah »
Proper Consumption of the Firstborn Sacrifice
Proper Consumption of the Firstborn Sacrifice
Negative Commandment 144Translated by Berel Bell
And the 144th prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating an unblemished firstborn animal outside of Jerusalem.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "In your own settlements you may not eat ... the firstborn of your cattle."
The Sifri says, "The word Bechoros refers to the firstborn animal. This verse teaches that a non-priest who eats from a firstborn animal, whether before or after the blood has been sprinkled,2 transgresses a prohibition."
It has been made clear to you that this prohibition includes two parts: that a non-priest is forbidden from eating an unblemished firstborn animal, and that a priest is forbidden from eating it outside Jerusalem. In both cases the prohibition applies only if the firstborn animal is unblemished.3
One who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes. Footnotes1.Ibid., 12:17.2.On the altar, after which a priest may eat it.3.If the animal has a blemish which invalidates it, it loses its sanctified status, and the prohibition no longer applies.
Negative Commandment 108
Redeeming Firstborn Animals
"But the firstborn of an ox, the firstborn of a sheep, or the firstborn of a goat you shall not redeem; they are holy"—Numbers 18:17.
It is forbidden to "redeem" a firstborn animal [i.e. exchange it for another animal or money that would be used to purchase another animal for sacrifice. Rather, it itself must be offered as a sacrifice].
It is, however, permitted to sell [a blemished] firstborn animal.Full text of this Mitzvah »
Redeeming Firstborn Animals
Redeeming Firstborn Animals
Negative Commandment 108Translated by Berel Bell
And the 108th prohibition is that we are forbidden from redeeming a kosher firstborn animal.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "You may not redeem, however, the firstborn of an ox, sheep, or goat since they are sacred."
One is, however, allowed to sell it, as explained in tractate Bechoros.2 The Sifra3 says, "Regarding a firstborn animal it is written, 'you may not redeem,' but it may be sold."
[The details4 of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Bechoros5 and in tractate Ma'aser Sheini.6]
Footnotes
1.Num. 18:17.2.31b.
3.Lev. 13:4.4.
See end of N109.
5.31b.
6.Chapter 1, Mishneh 2.
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 135
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Name of the Lord; offer praise, you servants of the Lord-
2. who stand in the House of the Lord, in the courtyards of the House of our God.
3. Praise the Lord, for the Lord is good; sing to His Name, for He is pleasant.
4. For God has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel as His beloved treasure.
5. For I know that the Lord is great, our Master is greater than all supernal beings.
6. All that the Lord desired He has done, in the heavens and on earth, in the seas and the depths.
7. He causes mists to rise from the ends of the earth; He makes lightning for the rain; He brings forth the wind from His vaults.
8. It was He who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, of man and beast.
9. He sent signs and wonders into the midst of Egypt, on Pharaoh and on all his servants.
10. It was He who struck down many nations, and slew mighty kings:
11. Sichon, king of the Amorites; Og, king of Bashan; and all the kingdoms of Canaan.
12. And He gave their lands as a heritage, a heritage to His people Israel.
13. Lord, Your Name is forever; Lord, Your remembrance is throughout all generations.
14. Indeed, the Lord will judge on behalf of His people, and have compassion on His servants.
15. The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the product of human hands.
16. They have a mouth, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see;
17. they have ears, but cannot hear; nor is there breath in their mouth.
18. Like them will their makers become-all who trust in them.
19. House of Israel, bless the Lord; House of Aaron, bless the Lord;
20. House of Levi, bless the Lord; you who fear the Lord, bless the Lord.
21. Blessed is the Lord from Zion, who dwells in Jerusalem. Praise the Lord!Chapter 136
This psalm contains twenty-six verses, corresponding to the twenty-six generations between the creation of the world and the giving of the Torah.
1. Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is forever.
2. Praise the God of the supernal beings, for His kindness is forever.
3. Praise the Master of the heavenly hosts, for His kindness is forever.
4. Who alone performs great wonders, for His kindness is forever.
5. Who makes the heavens with understanding, for His kindness is forever.
6. Who spreads forth the earth above the waters, for His kindness is forever.
7. Who makes the great lights, for His kindness is forever.
8. The sun to rule by day, for His kindness is forever.
9. The moon and stars to rule by night, for His kindness is forever.
10. Who struck Egypt through its firstborn, for His kindness is forever.
11. And brought Israel out of their midst, for His kindness is forever.
12. With a strong hand and with an outstretched arm, for His kindness is forever.
13. Who split the Sea of Reeds into sections, for His kindness is forever.
14. And brought Israel across it, for His kindness is forever.
15. And cast Pharaoh and his army into the Sea of Reeds, for His kindness is forever.
16. Who led His people through the desert, for His kindness is forever;
17. Who struck down great kings, for His kindness is forever.
18. And slew mighty kings, for His kindness is forever.
19. Sichon, king of the Amorites, for His kindness is forever.
20. And Og, king of Bashan, for His kindness is forever.
21. And gave their land as a heritage, for His kindness is forever.
22. A heritage to Israel His servant, for His kindness is forever.
23. Who remembered us in our humiliation, for His kindness is forever.
24. And redeemed us from our oppressors, for His kindness is forever.
25. Who gives food to all flesh, for His kindness is forever.
26. Praise the God of heaven, for His kindness is forever.Chapter 137
Referring to the time of the destruction of the Temple, this psalm tells of when Nebuchadnezzar would ask the Levites to sing in captivity as they had in the Temple, to which they would reply, "How can we sing the song of God upon alien soil?" They were then comforted by Divine inspiration.
1. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat and wept as we remembered Zion.
2. There, upon the willows, we hung our harps.
3. For there our captors demanded of us songs, and those who scorned us-rejoicing, [saying,] "Sing to us of the songs of Zion.”
4. How can we sing the song of the Lord on alien soil?
5. If I forget you, Jerusalem, let my right hand forget [its dexterity].
6. Let my tongue cleave to my palate if I will not remember you, if I will not bring to mind Jerusalem during my greatest joy!
7. Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites the day of [the destruction of] Jerusalem, when they said, "Raze it, raze it to its very foundation!”
8. O Babylon, who is destined to be laid waste, happy is he who will repay you in retribution for what you have inflicted on us.
9. Happy is he who will seize and crush your infants against the rock!Chapter 138
David offers awesome praises to God for His kindness to him, and for fulfilling His promise to grant him kingship.
1. By David. I will thank You with all my heart, in the presence of princes I shall praise You.
2. I will bow toward Your Holy Sanctuary, and praise Your Name for Your kindness and for Your truth; for You have exalted Your word above all Your Names.
3. On the day that I called out You answered me, You emboldened me, [You put] strength in my soul.
4. Lord, all the kings of the land will give thanks to You when they hear the words of Your mouth.
5. And they will sing of the Lord's ways, for the glory of the Lord is great.
6. For though the Lord is exalted, He sees the lowly; the High One castigates from afar.
7. If I walk in the midst of distress, keep me alive; against the wrath of my enemies stretch out Your hand, and let Your right hand deliver me.
8. Lord, complete [Your kindness] on my behalf. Lord, Your kindness is forever, do not forsake the work of Your hands.Chapter 139
A most prominent psalm that guides man in the ways of God as no other in all of the five books of Tehillim. Fortunate is he who recites it daily.
1. For the Conductor, by David, a psalm. O Lord, You have probed me, and You know.
2. You know my sitting down and my standing up; You perceive my thought from afar.
3. You encircle my going about and my lying down; You are familiar with all my paths.
4. For there was not yet a word on my tongue-and behold, Lord, You knew it all.
5. You have besieged me front and back, You have laid Your hand upon me.
6. Knowledge [to escape You] is beyond me; it is exalted, I cannot know it.
7. Where can I go [to escape] Your spirit? And where can I flee from Your presence?
8. If I ascend to the heavens, You are there; if I make my bed in the grave, behold, You are there.
9. Were I to take up wings as the dawn and dwell in the furthest part of the sea,
10. there, too, Your hand would guide me; Your right hand would hold me.
11. Were I to say, "Surely the darkness will shadow me," then the night would be as light around me.
12. Even the darkness obscures nothing from You; and the night shines like the day-the darkness is as light.
13. For You created my mind; You covered me in my mother's womb.
14. I will thank You, for I was formed in an awesome and wondrous way; unfathomable are Your works, though my soul perceives much.
15. My essence was not hidden from You even while I was born in concealment, formed in the depths of the earth.
16. Your eyes beheld my raw form; all [happenings] are inscribed in Your book, even those to be formed in future days-to Him they are the same.
17. How precious are Your thoughts to me, O God! How overwhelming, [even] their beginnings!
18. Were I to count them, they would outnumber the sand, even if I were to remain awake and always with You.
19. O that You would slay the wicked, O God, and men of blood [to whom I say], "Depart from me!”
20. They exalt You for wicked schemes, Your enemies raise [You] for falsehood.
21. Indeed, I hate those who hate You, Lord; I contend with those who rise up against You.
22. I hate them with the utmost hatred; I regard them as my own enemies.
23. Search me, Lord, and know my heart; test me and know my thoughts.
24. See if there is a vexing way in me, then lead me in the way of the world.Tanya: Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 42
• English Text: Lessons in Tanya
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
In describing earlier the fear a Jew should possess for G‑d, the Alter Rebbe said that it should be similar to the fear felt “when one stands before a king,” for G‑d is omnipresent and observes all man’s actions.
A question arises: When one stands before a king, he is not only being seen by the king, but he is also looking at him, and this helps him to stand in fear of him. In the analogue, however, this is not the case: though G‑d, the King, sees him, he fails to see G‑d.
The Alter Rebbe will now respond to this question by saying that there is yet another means by which an individual may awaken within himself the fear of G‑d — by being able to “see” the King. For by observing heaven and earth and all the created beings that people them, and realizing that they all derive their life from G‑d, he will have fear of Him.
ועוד זאת יזכור כי כמו שבמלך בשר ודם, עיקר היראה היא מפנימיותו וחיותו ולא מגופו, שהרי כשישן אין שום יראה ממנו
In addition to this, one should remember that, as in the case of a mortal king, the fear of him relates mainly to his inner essence and vitality and not to his body — for when he is asleep, though his body does not change, there is no fear of him,
This is because while he sleeps his inner essence and vitality are in a state of concealment. Clearly, then, they are the main reason for fearing a king while he is awake.
והנה פנימיותו וחיותו אין נראה לעיני בשר, רק בעיני השכל
and, surely, his inner essence and vitality are not perceived by physical eyes, but only by the mind’s eye,
על ידי ראיית עיני בשר בגופו ולבושיו, שיודע שחיותו מלובש בתוכם
through the physical eyes‘ beholding his body and garments, and knowing that his vitality is clothed in them.
This in turn leads the beholder to fear him.
ואם כן
And if this is so, then surely in the analogue as well, not only is the king seeing him, but he is seeing the king as well, and this causes him to fear G‑d. Moreover,
ככה ממש יש לו לירא את ה׳ על ידי ראיית עיני בשר בשמים ואר׳ וכל צבאם, אשר אור אין סוף ברוך הוא מלובש בהם להחיותם
he must truly likewise fear G‑d when gazing with his physical eyes at the heavens and earth and all their hosts, wherein is clothed the [infinite] light of the blessed Ein Sof that animates them.*
הגהה
*NOTE
The Alter Rebbe will now say that by looking at heaven and earth one not only becomes aware of their G‑dly vitalizing force, but also perceives how the world and all its inhabitants are truly nullified to the divine life-force. This can be perceived by observing the stars and planets, all of which travel in a westerly direction. In doing so they express their nullification to the Shechinah, the Divine Presence, which is in the west.
וגם נראה בראיית העין שהם בטלים לאורו יתברך בהשתחוואתם כל יום כלפי מערב בשקיעתם, כמאמר רז״ל על פסוק: וצבא השמים לך משתחוים, שהשכינה במערב
And it is also seen with a glance of the eye that they are nullified to His blessed light, by the fact that they “prostrate” themselves every day towards the west at the time of their setting. As the Rabbis, of blessed memory, commented on the verse:1 “...and the hosts of the heavens bow before You,” that the Shechinah abides in the west,
ונמצא הילוכם כל היום כלפי מערב הוא דרך השתחוואה וביטול
Hence, not only do the heavenly hosts show their self-abnegation when they set in the west, but their daily orbit westwards is a kind of prostration and self-nullification.
We find it written that if the sun, moon and planets were to follow their natural characteristics they would travel in an easterly, rather than in a westerly direction. That they do not do so testifies to their constant self-nullification to the Divine Presence which is found in the west. For the four points of the compass are rooted in the Supernal Sefirot, and Malchut — the level of the Shechinah — is in the west. Thus, even man’s eye observes the self-nullification of creation to the divine life-force.
והנה גם מי שלא ראה את המלך מעולם ואינו מכירו כלל, אף על פי כן, כשנכנס לחצר המלך
Even he who has never seen the king and does not recognize him at all, nevertheless, when he enters the royal court,
“There the king is not revealed at all: it is not the place of his royal throne and the like. (In the analogue this refers to the physical world, in which various proofs are necessary in order to bring about self-nullification to the King.)” — Note of the Rebbe.
ורואה שרים רבים ונכבדים משתחוים לאיש אחד
and sees many honorable princes prostrating themselves before one man,
“The person who enters and looks superficially is unable to detect a difference between him and the other men present.” — Note of the Rebbe.
תפול עליו אימה ופחד
there falls on him a dread and awe.
So, too, the self-nullification before G‑d shown by the awesome creatures, such as the heavenly bodies, enables one to be in fear and awe of Him.
END OF NOTE
However, the question may be asked: When one gazes at the body of a physical king, he sees before him beyond a shadow of a doubt the king himself. He therefore can extrapolate intellectually about the inner essence and vitality of the king and come to fear him. This is not so, however, with regard to physical creatures. The divine life-force is so concealed within them through so many garbs of concealment, that it is quite possible for one to gaze at them and fail to be aware that their bodies are but garments to the divine life-force they contain.
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to say, that it is therefore important for a person who observes physical created beings to cultivate the habit of immediately recalling that within the concealment of their external trappings and garments, there is to be found the G‑dliness that animates them. By doing so, one is then able to perceive the divine life-force found within the world.
ואף שהוא על ידי התלבשות בלבושים רבים
And although many garments are involved in this vestiture, so that when one gazes at created beings, one does not perceive that they are but garments to their divine life-force,
הרי אין הבדל והפרש כלל ביראת מלך בשר ודם, בין שהוא ערום, ובין שהוא לבוש לבוש אחד, ובין שהוא לבוש בלבושים רבים
there is no difference or distinction at all in the fear of a mortal king, whether he be naked,2 or clothed in one or many garments.
It is the realization that the king is found within the garments that creates the fear of him. And the same, the Alter Rebbe will conclude, is true here. When a person becomes accustomed to remember that when he gazes upon created beings he is in reality gazing upon the King’s garments, he will then come to fear Him.
אלא העיקר הוא ההרגל, להרגיל דעתו ומחשבתו תמיד, להיות קבוע בלבו ומוחו תמיד, אשר כל מה שרואה בעיניו, השמים והאר׳ ומלואה, הכל הםלבושים החיצונים של המלך הקב״ה
The essential thing, however, is the training to habituate one’s mind and thought continuously, so that it always remain imprinted in his heart and mind, that everything one sees with his eyes — the heavens and earth and all they contain — constitutes the outer garments of the king, the Holy One, blessed be He.
ועל ידי זה יזכור תמיד על פנימיותם וחיותם
In this way he will constantly remember their inwardness and vitality, which is G‑dliness. This will create within him a fear of G‑d.
The Rebbe explains that what now follows answers a question: How can we possibly say here that the nullification of the world to G‑d is a concept that can be perceived intellectually, when in ch. 33 the Alter Rebbe explained that this was a matter of faith? In this chapter too, we have learned that it is a matter of faith — “that all Jews are believers, descendants of believers,” and so on. Faith and intellect are not only distinct entities, they are antithetical; for example, when something is understood, faith is not necessary.
The Alter Rebbe therefore now goes on to explain that this intellectual perception is also implicit in the word emunah (“faith”). For this word is etymologically rooted in the word uman (“artisan”). In order for an artisan with a talent for painting, creating vessels, or whatever, to be successful, he must habituate and train his hands; only then will they reveal the latent talents of the artistry found in his soul.
The same is true here: The soul of every Jew possesses the abovementioned faith. However, in order for this faith to be actualized, so that one’s actions will be in consonance with it, one must habituate and train himself to realize that all he sees — heaven and earth and all of creation — are but G‑d’s external garments. By constantly remembering that their inwardness is G‑dliness, the soul’s essential faith will be revealed and will affect one’s actions. His bodily organs will then follow the dictates of his faith.
וזה נכלל גם כן בלשון אמונה, שהוא לשון רגילות, שמרגיל האדם את עצמו, כמו אומן שמאמן ידיו וכו׳
This is also implicit in the word emunah (“faith”), which is a term indicating “training” to which a person habituates himself, like a craftsman who trains his hands, and so forth.
The Rebbe notes that “who trains his hands” means: “He is cognizant of the craft in his soul; he has a natural talent for it, but needs only to train his hands, so that it will find tangible expression in his actions (be it through art, or fashioning vessels, or the like).”
Thus, the analogue contains both aspects: The king sees the individual, and he sees the king, as it were, by looking at created beings and perceiving through them the divine life-force that vitalizes them.
* * *
The Rebbe notes that the reason the Alter Rebbe now goes on to say “There should also be etc.” is that until now it has been explained how a Jew generates the fear of heaven through intellectual contemplation. The degree of fear he arouses will correspond exactly to the extent of his contemplation; the deeper the contemplation, the greater his fear. It also depends on how much each individual is governed by his intellect. Furthermore, it is too much to expect that all people constantly achieve a state of intellectual awareness — yet all people are obliged to stand in constant fear of heaven. The Alter Rebbe therefore now goes on to elaborate on a frame of mind which can and must exist constantly — “acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven.” This is not attained through contemplation. Rather it comes as a result of faith alone — and this state can exist constantly in all individuals.
וגם להיות לזכרון תמיד לשון חז״ל: קבלת עול מלכות שמים, שהוא כענין: שום תשים עליך מלך
There should also be a constant remembrance (it is constant because it does not depend on prior contemplation, but rather on pure faith) of the dictum of the Sages, of blessed memory, “acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven,” which parallels the injunction,3 “You shall appoint a king (i.e., G‑d) over you,”
כמו שכתוב במקום אחר וכו׳
as has been explained elsewhere, and so on.
This is also what the Alter Rebbe says earlier in Tanya (beginning of ch. 41): “Even though after all this [meditation] no fear or dread descends upon him in a manifest manner in his heart,” still he should accept upon himself G‑d as his king, and accept upon himself the yoke of the heavenly Kingdom. As the Alter Rebbe explains there, this attribute is found within every Jew in a sincere manner, because of the nature of Jewish souls not to rebel against G‑d, the King of kings. This level of fear can therefore always be present.
כי הקב״ה מניח את העליונים והתחתונים ומייחד מלכותו עלינו וכו׳, ואנחנו מקבלים וכו׳
For G‑d, blessed be He, forgoes the creatures of the higher and lower worlds, i.e., they are not the ultimate intent of creation, and uniquely bestows His kingdom upon us, ...and we accept [the heavenly yoke].
וזהו ענין ההשתחוואות שבתפלת שמונה עשרה, אחר קבלת עול מלכות שמים בדבור בקריאת שמע
And this is the significance of the obeisances in the prayer of the Eighteen Benedictions, following the verbal acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven in the Reading of Shema, when we say, “...the L‑rd is our G‑d, the L‑rd is one,” and so on,
לחזור ולקבל בפועל ממש במעשה וכו׳, כמו שכתוב במקום אחר
whereby one accepts it once again in actual deed, and so on (for by bowing in the course of the prayer of Shemoneh Esreh one shows one’s acceptance in actual deed of one’s self-nullification to G‑d), as is explained elsewhere.
Rambam:• Sefer Hamitzvos:English Text | Hebrew Text |
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassNegative Commandment 144
Proper Consumption of the Firstborn Sacrifice
"You may not eat within your gates...and the firstborn of your cattle"—Deuteronomy 12:17.
It is forbidden for a priest to eat an unblemished firstborn animal outside of Jerusalem. In addition, it is forbidden for a non-priest to eat of a non-blemished firstborn animal, regardless of the location.Full text of this Mitzvah »
Proper Consumption of the Firstborn Sacrifice
Proper Consumption of the Firstborn Sacrifice
Negative Commandment 144Translated by Berel Bell
And the 144th prohibition is that we are forbidden from eating an unblemished firstborn animal outside of Jerusalem.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "In your own settlements you may not eat ... the firstborn of your cattle."
The Sifri says, "The word Bechoros refers to the firstborn animal. This verse teaches that a non-priest who eats from a firstborn animal, whether before or after the blood has been sprinkled,2 transgresses a prohibition."
It has been made clear to you that this prohibition includes two parts: that a non-priest is forbidden from eating an unblemished firstborn animal, and that a priest is forbidden from eating it outside Jerusalem. In both cases the prohibition applies only if the firstborn animal is unblemished.3
One who transgresses this prohibition is punished by lashes. Footnotes1.Ibid., 12:17.2.On the altar, after which a priest may eat it.3.If the animal has a blemish which invalidates it, it loses its sanctified status, and the prohibition no longer applies.
Negative Commandment 108
Redeeming Firstborn Animals
"But the firstborn of an ox, the firstborn of a sheep, or the firstborn of a goat you shall not redeem; they are holy"—Numbers 18:17.
It is forbidden to "redeem" a firstborn animal [i.e. exchange it for another animal or money that would be used to purchase another animal for sacrifice. Rather, it itself must be offered as a sacrifice].
It is, however, permitted to sell [a blemished] firstborn animal.Full text of this Mitzvah »
Redeeming Firstborn Animals
Redeeming Firstborn Animals
Negative Commandment 108Translated by Berel Bell
And the 108th prohibition is that we are forbidden from redeeming a kosher firstborn animal.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "You may not redeem, however, the firstborn of an ox, sheep, or goat since they are sacred."
One is, however, allowed to sell it, as explained in tractate Bechoros.2 The Sifra3 says, "Regarding a firstborn animal it is written, 'you may not redeem,' but it may be sold."
[The details4 of this mitzvah are explained in tractate Bechoros5 and in tractate Ma'aser Sheini.6]
Footnotes
1.Num. 18:17.2.31b.
3.Lev. 13:4.4.
See end of N109.
5.31b.
6.Chapter 1, Mishneh 2.
• 1 Chapter: Sechirut Sechirut - Chapter 1 English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassSechirut - Chapter 1
"I will thankfully acknowledge You with an upright heart, as I study Your righteous judgments" (Psalms 119:7).
The Thirteenth Book
SEFER MISHPATIM
The Book of Judgments
It consists of five halachot. They are, in order:
Hilchot Sechirut - The Laws of Rentals and Employer-Employee Relations; Hilchot She'ilah UFikadon - The Laws Governing Borrowing and Governing Entrusted Objects;
Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh - The Laws Pertaining to Lenders and Borrowers; Hilchot To'en VNit'an - The Laws Governing Disputes between Plaintiffs and Defendants; and Hilchot Nachalot - The Laws Pertaining to Inheritances
The Thirteenth Book
SEFER MISHPATIM
The Book of Judgments
It consists of five halachot. They are, in order:
Hilchot Sechirut - The Laws of Rentals and Employer-Employee Relations; Hilchot She'ilah UFikadon - The Laws Governing Borrowing and Governing Entrusted Objects;
Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh - The Laws Pertaining to Lenders and Borrowers; Hilchot To'en VNit'an - The Laws Governing Disputes between Plaintiffs and Defendants; and Hilchot Nachalot - The Laws Pertaining to Inheritances
Introduction to Hilchos Sechirut
They contain seven mitzvot: three positive mitzvot and four negative mitzvot. They are:
1) The laws governing a hired worker and a paid watchman;
2) To pay a worker his wages when due;
3) Not to delay payment of a worker's wage after it falls due;
4) For a worker to be allowed to eat from the produce with which he is working;
5) That a worker not eat from the produce at the time he should be working;
6) That a worker not take more than what he eats;
7) Not to muzzle an ox while it is threshing.
These mitzvot are explained in the chapters that follow. הלכות שכירות - הקדמה
הלכות שכירות יש בכללן שבע מצות שלש מצות עשה וארבע מצות לא תעשה וזהו פרטן:
(א) דין שכיר ושומר שכר.
(ב) ליתן שכר שכיר ביומו.
(ג) שלא יאחר שכר שכיר אחר זמנו.
(ד) שיאכל השכיר מן המחובר שעושה בו.
(ה) שלא יאכל השכיר מן המחובר בשעת מלאכה.
(ו) שלא יוליך השכיר בידו יתר על מה שיאכל.
(ז) שלא יחסום שור בדישו
וביאור מצות אלו בפרקים אלו:
They contain seven mitzvot: three positive mitzvot and four negative mitzvot. They are:
1) The laws governing a hired worker and a paid watchman;
2) To pay a worker his wages when due;
3) Not to delay payment of a worker's wage after it falls due;
4) For a worker to be allowed to eat from the produce with which he is working;
5) That a worker not eat from the produce at the time he should be working;
6) That a worker not take more than what he eats;
7) Not to muzzle an ox while it is threshing.
These mitzvot are explained in the chapters that follow. הלכות שכירות - הקדמה
הלכות שכירות יש בכללן שבע מצות שלש מצות עשה וארבע מצות לא תעשה וזהו פרטן:
(א) דין שכיר ושומר שכר.
(ב) ליתן שכר שכיר ביומו.
(ג) שלא יאחר שכר שכיר אחר זמנו.
(ד) שיאכל השכיר מן המחובר שעושה בו.
(ה) שלא יאכל השכיר מן המחובר בשעת מלאכה.
(ו) שלא יוליך השכיר בידו יתר על מה שיאכל.
(ז) שלא יחסום שור בדישו
וביאור מצות אלו בפרקים אלו:
1 The Torah mentions four types of watchmen, who are governed by three different rules. The four types of watchmen are an unpaid watchman, a borrower, a paid watchman and a renter.אארבעה שומרים נאמרו בתורה ושלשה דינין יש להם ואלו הן הארבעה שומרין שומר חנם והשואל ונושא שכר והשוכר:
2 These are the three rules that govern cases involving these watchmen: When an entrusted article is stolen from or lost by an unpaid watchman and - needless to say, when the entrusted article is destroyed by forces beyond the watchman's control - e.g., it was an animal and it died or was taken captive -the watchman must take an oath that he guarded the article in a manner appropriate for a watchman, and then he is freed of liability, as Exodus 22:6-7 states: "And it was stolen from the man's home... and the homeowner shall approach the judges."
A borrower must make restitution in all instances, whether the borrowed object was lost, stolen, or destroyed by factors beyond his control - e.g., a borrowed animal died, was injured or taken captive. For with regard to a borrower, ibid.:13 states: "If it becomes injured or dies - when its owner is not with it - he must certainly make restitution."
A paid watchman and a renter are governed by the same laws. If the article that was rented or was entrusted for a fee was lost or stolen, they must make restitution. If the article is lost by forces beyond the watchman's control - e.g., an animal died, was injured, was taken captive or was attacked by a wild animal - the watchman is required to take an oath, and then he is freed of liability, as ibid.:9-10 states: "If it died, was injured or taken captive, and there are no witnesses, an oath of God shall be between them." And ibid.:11 states: "If it is stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner."
Thus, an unpaid watchman takes an oath in all instances. A borrower makes restitution in all instances except when an animal dies performing the labor for which it was borrowed, as will be explained. And a paid watchman and a renter make restitution when the article is lost or stolen, and take an oath when it is destroyed by forces beyond their control - e.g., it was injured, taken captive, died, attacked by beasts, lost in a ship that sank at sea, seized by armed thieves - or lost in any other major matter over which the watchman has no control.בואלו הן שלשה דינין שלהן: ש"ח שנגנב הפקדון ממנו או אבד ואין צריך לומר אם נאנס הפקדון אונס גדול כגון שהיתה בהמה ומתה או נשבית ה"ז נשבע ששמר כדרך השומרין ופטור שנאמר וגונב מבית האיש וגו' ונקרב בעל הבית אל האלהים השואל משלם הכל בין שאבד דבר השאול או נגנב בין שארעו אונס גדול מזה כגון שמתה הבהמה השאולה או נשברה או נשבית שכך כתוב בשואל ונשבר או מת בעליו אין עמו שלם ישלם נושא שכר או השוכר שניהם דין אחד יש להן אם נגנב או אבד הדבר השכור או שנטל שכר על שמירתו הרי אלו משלמים ואם ארעו אונס גדול מזה כגון שהיתה בהמה ומתה או נשברה או נשבית או נטרפה הרי אלו נשבעין שנאנסה ופטורין שנאמר ומת או נשבר או נשבה אין רואה שבועת ה' וגו' וכתיב אם גנוב יגנב מעמו ישלם לבעליו וגו' נמצאת אומר שומר חנם נשבע על הכל והשואל משלם את הכל חוץ מן המתה בשעת מלאכה כמו שיתבאר נושא שכר והשוכר משלמין את האבידה ואת הגניבה ונשבעין על האונסין הגדולים כגון שבורה ושבויה ומתה וטריפה או שאבד הדבר בספינה שטבעה בים או נלקח בלסטים מזויין וכל כיוצא באלו משאר אונסין הגדולים:
A borrower must make restitution in all instances, whether the borrowed object was lost, stolen, or destroyed by factors beyond his control - e.g., a borrowed animal died, was injured or taken captive. For with regard to a borrower, ibid.:13 states: "If it becomes injured or dies - when its owner is not with it - he must certainly make restitution."
A paid watchman and a renter are governed by the same laws. If the article that was rented or was entrusted for a fee was lost or stolen, they must make restitution. If the article is lost by forces beyond the watchman's control - e.g., an animal died, was injured, was taken captive or was attacked by a wild animal - the watchman is required to take an oath, and then he is freed of liability, as ibid.:9-10 states: "If it died, was injured or taken captive, and there are no witnesses, an oath of God shall be between them." And ibid.:11 states: "If it is stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner."
Thus, an unpaid watchman takes an oath in all instances. A borrower makes restitution in all instances except when an animal dies performing the labor for which it was borrowed, as will be explained. And a paid watchman and a renter make restitution when the article is lost or stolen, and take an oath when it is destroyed by forces beyond their control - e.g., it was injured, taken captive, died, attacked by beasts, lost in a ship that sank at sea, seized by armed thieves - or lost in any other major matter over which the watchman has no control.בואלו הן שלשה דינין שלהן: ש"ח שנגנב הפקדון ממנו או אבד ואין צריך לומר אם נאנס הפקדון אונס גדול כגון שהיתה בהמה ומתה או נשבית ה"ז נשבע ששמר כדרך השומרין ופטור שנאמר וגונב מבית האיש וגו' ונקרב בעל הבית אל האלהים השואל משלם הכל בין שאבד דבר השאול או נגנב בין שארעו אונס גדול מזה כגון שמתה הבהמה השאולה או נשברה או נשבית שכך כתוב בשואל ונשבר או מת בעליו אין עמו שלם ישלם נושא שכר או השוכר שניהם דין אחד יש להן אם נגנב או אבד הדבר השכור או שנטל שכר על שמירתו הרי אלו משלמים ואם ארעו אונס גדול מזה כגון שהיתה בהמה ומתה או נשברה או נשבית או נטרפה הרי אלו נשבעין שנאנסה ופטורין שנאמר ומת או נשבר או נשבה אין רואה שבועת ה' וגו' וכתיב אם גנוב יגנב מעמו ישלם לבעליו וגו' נמצאת אומר שומר חנם נשבע על הכל והשואל משלם את הכל חוץ מן המתה בשעת מלאכה כמו שיתבאר נושא שכר והשוכר משלמין את האבידה ואת הגניבה ונשבעין על האונסין הגדולים כגון שבורה ושבויה ומתה וטריפה או שאבד הדבר בספינה שטבעה בים או נלקח בלסטים מזויין וכל כיוצא באלו משאר אונסין הגדולים:
3 The following rules apply when a person entrusts an article to a colleague for safekeeping, whether he offers payment or not or lends an article or hires it out. If the watchman also asks the owner of the article to work for him or hires him together with the article, the watchman is never held liable at all. Even if the watchman is negligent in his care of the article he was watching, and it was lost because of his negligence, he is not liable, as Exodus 22:14 states: "If his owner is with him, he need not make restitution. If he is a hired worker, it comes with his wages."
When does the above apply? When the watchman asked or hired the owner to work at the time he took the article, even if the owner was not with him at the time the article was stolen, lost or destroyed by forces beyond his control. If, by contrast, he took the article and became responsible as a watchman at the outset, and afterwards asked or hired the owner to work, he is not absolved of responsibility. Even if the owner was standing nearby at the time the entrusted article was destroyed by forces beyond the watchman's control, the watchman is liable to pay, as implied by ibid.: 13: "If the owner is not with him, he must certainly make restitution."
According to the Oral Tradition, these verses were interpreted to mean: If the owner was with the borrower at the time the article or animal was borrowed, he is not liable, even if he was not with him at the time it was stolen or died. If, however, he was not with the borrower at the time the article or animal was borrowed, he is liable, even if he was with him at the time it was stolen or died. The same laws apply to other watchmen. If the owners are "with them", they are all free of liability. Even if they are negligent, if the owners are "with them", they are all free of liability.גהמפקיד אצל חבירו בין בחנם בין בשכר או השאילו או השכירו אם שאל השומר את הבעלים עם הדבר שלהן או שכרן הרי השומר פטור מכלום אפילו פשע בדבר ששמר ואבד מחמת הפשיעה ה"ז פטור שנאמר אם בעליו עמו לא ישלם אם שכיר הוא בא בשכרו בד"א כששאל הבעלים או שכרן בעת שנטל החפץ אף על פי שאין הבעלים שם עמו בעת הגניבה והאבידה או בעת שנאנס אבל נטל החפץ ונעשה עליו שומר תחלה ואחר כך שכר הבעלים או שאלן אע"פ שהיו הבעלים עומדין שם בעת שנאנס הדבר השמור ה"ז משלם שנאמר בעליו אין עמו שלם ישלם מפי השמועה למדו היה עמו בשעת השאלה אף על פי שאינו בעת הגניבה והמיתה פטור לא היה עמו בשעת השאלה אע"פ שהיה עמו בעת המיתה או השבייה חייב והוא הדין לשאר השומרים שכולן בבעלים פטורין אפילו פשיעה בבעלים פטור:
When does the above apply? When the watchman asked or hired the owner to work at the time he took the article, even if the owner was not with him at the time the article was stolen, lost or destroyed by forces beyond his control. If, by contrast, he took the article and became responsible as a watchman at the outset, and afterwards asked or hired the owner to work, he is not absolved of responsibility. Even if the owner was standing nearby at the time the entrusted article was destroyed by forces beyond the watchman's control, the watchman is liable to pay, as implied by ibid.: 13: "If the owner is not with him, he must certainly make restitution."
According to the Oral Tradition, these verses were interpreted to mean: If the owner was with the borrower at the time the article or animal was borrowed, he is not liable, even if he was not with him at the time it was stolen or died. If, however, he was not with the borrower at the time the article or animal was borrowed, he is liable, even if he was with him at the time it was stolen or died. The same laws apply to other watchmen. If the owners are "with them", they are all free of liability. Even if they are negligent, if the owners are "with them", they are all free of liability.גהמפקיד אצל חבירו בין בחנם בין בשכר או השאילו או השכירו אם שאל השומר את הבעלים עם הדבר שלהן או שכרן הרי השומר פטור מכלום אפילו פשע בדבר ששמר ואבד מחמת הפשיעה ה"ז פטור שנאמר אם בעליו עמו לא ישלם אם שכיר הוא בא בשכרו בד"א כששאל הבעלים או שכרן בעת שנטל החפץ אף על פי שאין הבעלים שם עמו בעת הגניבה והאבידה או בעת שנאנס אבל נטל החפץ ונעשה עליו שומר תחלה ואחר כך שכר הבעלים או שאלן אע"פ שהיו הבעלים עומדין שם בעת שנאנס הדבר השמור ה"ז משלם שנאמר בעליו אין עמו שלם ישלם מפי השמועה למדו היה עמו בשעת השאלה אף על פי שאינו בעת הגניבה והמיתה פטור לא היה עמו בשעת השאלה אע"פ שהיה עמו בעת המיתה או השבייה חייב והוא הדין לשאר השומרים שכולן בבעלים פטורין אפילו פשיעה בבעלים פטור:
4 Whenever a watchman is negligent when he begins caring for the article, even though the article is ultimately destroyed by forces beyond his control, he is liable, as will be explained.
A borrower is not allowed to lend the entrusted article to another person. Even if he borrows a Torah scroll - in which instance, anyone who reads it performs a mitzvah - he may not lend it to someone else. Similarly, a renter is not permitted to rent the entrusted article to another person. Even if a Torah scroll was rented to him, he may not rent it to someone else. The rationale is that the owner will tell the watchman: "I do not want my article to be in someone else's hands."
The following rules apply if the watchman transgressed and entrusted the article to another watchman. If there are witnesses who testify that the second watchman guarded the article in an appropriate manner, and the article was destroyed by forces beyond his control, the first watchman is not liable. For there are witnesses that the article was destroyed by forces beyond his control.
If there are no witnesses to give such testimony, the first watchman is liable to pay the owners, for he entrusted the article to another watchman. Afterwards, he should enter into litigation with the second watchman. Even if the first watchman was not paid for his services and he entrusted the article to a paid watchman, he is liable. For the owner of the article will tell him: "Although you are an unpaid watchman, you are trustworthy in my eyes, and I am willing to believe your oath. I don't consider the other person trustworthy."
For this reason, if the owner of the article would frequently entrust articles of this nature to the second watchman, the first watchman is not required to make restitution. For he could tell the owner: "Yesterday, you were willing to entrust the article that you entrusted to me to this person."
In the above instance, the watchman is freed of liability only when he does not reduce the level of responsibility for watching the article. What is meant by reducing the level of responsibility for watching the article? For example, the article was entrusted to the first watchman for a fee, and he entrusted it to the second watchman without charge, or the first watchman was a borrower, and he entrusted it to a paid watchman. In such instances, since the watchman reduced the level of responsibility for watching the article, he is considered to be negligent and is required to pay.
[The above applies even if when the article was originally entrusted, the owner was working for or hired by the first watchman. For that watchman removed the entrusted article from his domain and entrusted it to another watchman.דכל שומר שפשע בתחלתו אף על פי שנאנס בסופו חייב כמו שיתבאר ואין השואל רשאי להשאיל אפילו שאל ספר תורה שכל שקורא בו עושה מצוה לא ישאילנו לאחר וכן אין השוכר רשאי להשכיר אפילו השכירו ס"ת לא ישכירנו לאחר שהרי זה אומר לו אין רצוני שיהיה פקדוני ביד אחר עבר השומר ומסר לשומר השני אם יש עדים ששמרה השומר השני כדרך השומרין ונאנס פטור השומר הראשון שהרי יש עדים שנאנס ואם אין שם עדים חייב השומר הראשון לשלם לבעלים מפני שמסר לשומר אחר ויעשה הוא דין עם השומר השני אפילו היה הראשון ש"ח ומסר לשומר שכר חייב שהרי יש לבעל החפץ לומר לו אתה נאמן אצלי להשבע וזה אינו נאמן לפיכך אם היה דרך הבעלים להפקיד תמיד דבר זה אצל השומר השני ה"ז השומר הראשון פטור מלשלם שהרי הוא אומר לבעלים זה הדבר שהפקדתם אצלי או השאלתם אמש הייתם מפקידין אותו אצל זה שהפקדתי אני אצלו והוא שלא ימעט שמירתו כיצד ימעט שמירתו כגון שהיה מופקד אצלו בשכר והפקידו אצל אותו השני בחנם או שהיה שאול אצלו והפקידו אצל אותו השני בשכר הואיל ומיעט שמירתו פושע הוא ומשלם אע"פ ששאל או ששכר בבעלים הרי הוא הוציא הדבר השמור מידו ליד שומר אחר:
A borrower is not allowed to lend the entrusted article to another person. Even if he borrows a Torah scroll - in which instance, anyone who reads it performs a mitzvah - he may not lend it to someone else. Similarly, a renter is not permitted to rent the entrusted article to another person. Even if a Torah scroll was rented to him, he may not rent it to someone else. The rationale is that the owner will tell the watchman: "I do not want my article to be in someone else's hands."
The following rules apply if the watchman transgressed and entrusted the article to another watchman. If there are witnesses who testify that the second watchman guarded the article in an appropriate manner, and the article was destroyed by forces beyond his control, the first watchman is not liable. For there are witnesses that the article was destroyed by forces beyond his control.
If there are no witnesses to give such testimony, the first watchman is liable to pay the owners, for he entrusted the article to another watchman. Afterwards, he should enter into litigation with the second watchman. Even if the first watchman was not paid for his services and he entrusted the article to a paid watchman, he is liable. For the owner of the article will tell him: "Although you are an unpaid watchman, you are trustworthy in my eyes, and I am willing to believe your oath. I don't consider the other person trustworthy."
For this reason, if the owner of the article would frequently entrust articles of this nature to the second watchman, the first watchman is not required to make restitution. For he could tell the owner: "Yesterday, you were willing to entrust the article that you entrusted to me to this person."
In the above instance, the watchman is freed of liability only when he does not reduce the level of responsibility for watching the article. What is meant by reducing the level of responsibility for watching the article? For example, the article was entrusted to the first watchman for a fee, and he entrusted it to the second watchman without charge, or the first watchman was a borrower, and he entrusted it to a paid watchman. In such instances, since the watchman reduced the level of responsibility for watching the article, he is considered to be negligent and is required to pay.
[The above applies even if when the article was originally entrusted, the owner was working for or hired by the first watchman. For that watchman removed the entrusted article from his domain and entrusted it to another watchman.דכל שומר שפשע בתחלתו אף על פי שנאנס בסופו חייב כמו שיתבאר ואין השואל רשאי להשאיל אפילו שאל ספר תורה שכל שקורא בו עושה מצוה לא ישאילנו לאחר וכן אין השוכר רשאי להשכיר אפילו השכירו ס"ת לא ישכירנו לאחר שהרי זה אומר לו אין רצוני שיהיה פקדוני ביד אחר עבר השומר ומסר לשומר השני אם יש עדים ששמרה השומר השני כדרך השומרין ונאנס פטור השומר הראשון שהרי יש עדים שנאנס ואם אין שם עדים חייב השומר הראשון לשלם לבעלים מפני שמסר לשומר אחר ויעשה הוא דין עם השומר השני אפילו היה הראשון ש"ח ומסר לשומר שכר חייב שהרי יש לבעל החפץ לומר לו אתה נאמן אצלי להשבע וזה אינו נאמן לפיכך אם היה דרך הבעלים להפקיד תמיד דבר זה אצל השומר השני ה"ז השומר הראשון פטור מלשלם שהרי הוא אומר לבעלים זה הדבר שהפקדתם אצלי או השאלתם אמש הייתם מפקידין אותו אצל זה שהפקדתי אני אצלו והוא שלא ימעט שמירתו כיצד ימעט שמירתו כגון שהיה מופקד אצלו בשכר והפקידו אצל אותו השני בחנם או שהיה שאול אצלו והפקידו אצל אותו השני בשכר הואיל ומיעט שמירתו פושע הוא ומשלם אע"פ ששאל או ששכר בבעלים הרי הוא הוציא הדבר השמור מידו ליד שומר אחר:
5 If the second watchman was able to bring proof that would free the first watchman from responsibility for guarding the article, he is not liable.
What is implied? A paid watchman entrusted an animal that was entrusted to him to an unpaid watchman. If the second watchman brought witnesses who testify that the animal died in a natural manner, the first watchman is not liable. The same principles apply in all analogous situations.הואם הביא השומר השני הראייה שיפטר בה שומר ראשון כדין שמירתו הרי זה פטור כיצד שומר שכר שנתן הבהמה השמורה אצלו לש"ח אם הביא השומר השני עדים שמתה הבהמה כדרכה הרי השומר הראשון פטור וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
What is implied? A paid watchman entrusted an animal that was entrusted to him to an unpaid watchman. If the second watchman brought witnesses who testify that the animal died in a natural manner, the first watchman is not liable. The same principles apply in all analogous situations.הואם הביא השומר השני הראייה שיפטר בה שומר ראשון כדין שמירתו הרי זה פטור כיצד שומר שכר שנתן הבהמה השמורה אצלו לש"ח אם הביא השומר השני עדים שמתה הבהמה כדרכה הרי השומר הראשון פטור וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
6 When a watchman entrusted an animal entrusted to him to another watchman and increased the responsibility of the watchman and the animal died, the owner receives the benefit.
What is implied? A person rents a cow from a colleague and then lends it to another person. Afterwards, the cow dies in an ordinary manner in the possession of the borrower. Since the borrower is required to make full restitution, he should return the worth of the cow to its owners. For the renter is not carrying out business with his colleague's cow. Similar principles apply in all analogous situations.
The following rules apply when a person was in possession of an entrusted object belonging to a colleague and gave it to another person to bring to its owner. Since the first watchman is responsible for the article until it reaches its owner's domain, if he desires to retrieve the article from the second watchman, he may. If it is established that the first watchman has denied that property was entrusted to him, he cannot retrieve the article from the second watchman although he remains responsible for the entrusted article.ושומר שמסר לשומר אחר והוסיף בשמירתו ומתה ההנאה לבעלים כיצד השוכר פרה מחבירו והשאילה לאחר ומתה כדרכה ביד השואל הואיל והשואל חייב בכל יחזירו דמי הפרה לבעלים שאין זה השוכר עושה סחורה בפרתו של חבירו וכן כל כיוצא בזה היה בידו פקדון ושלחו ביד אחר לבעליו הואיל והשומר הראשון חייב באחריותו עד שיגיע ליד הבעלים אם בא לחזור ולהחזיר הפקדון מיד השומר השני מחזיר ואם הוחזק השומר הראשון כפרן אינו יכול להחזיר הפקדון מיד השומר השני אף על פי שעדיין הפקדון באחריותו של ראשון:
What is implied? A person rents a cow from a colleague and then lends it to another person. Afterwards, the cow dies in an ordinary manner in the possession of the borrower. Since the borrower is required to make full restitution, he should return the worth of the cow to its owners. For the renter is not carrying out business with his colleague's cow. Similar principles apply in all analogous situations.
The following rules apply when a person was in possession of an entrusted object belonging to a colleague and gave it to another person to bring to its owner. Since the first watchman is responsible for the article until it reaches its owner's domain, if he desires to retrieve the article from the second watchman, he may. If it is established that the first watchman has denied that property was entrusted to him, he cannot retrieve the article from the second watchman although he remains responsible for the entrusted article.ושומר שמסר לשומר אחר והוסיף בשמירתו ומתה ההנאה לבעלים כיצד השוכר פרה מחבירו והשאילה לאחר ומתה כדרכה ביד השואל הואיל והשואל חייב בכל יחזירו דמי הפרה לבעלים שאין זה השוכר עושה סחורה בפרתו של חבירו וכן כל כיוצא בזה היה בידו פקדון ושלחו ביד אחר לבעליו הואיל והשומר הראשון חייב באחריותו עד שיגיע ליד הבעלים אם בא לחזור ולהחזיר הפקדון מיד השומר השני מחזיר ואם הוחזק השומר הראשון כפרן אינו יכול להחזיר הפקדון מיד השומר השני אף על פי שעדיין הפקדון באחריותו של ראשון:
• 3 Chapters: Bechorot Bechorot - Perek 2, Bechorot Bechorot - Perek 3, Bechorot Bechorot - Perek 4 English Text | Hebrew Text | Audio: Listen | Download
Audio: Listen | Download
Bechorot - Perek 2
1
If any of the permanent blemishes which disqualify consecrated animals and require them to be redeemed is contracted by a firstborn animal, it may be slaughtered for this reason in any place. We have already explained those blemishes in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach. Those that are appropriate to apply to a male animal number 67.
אכל המומים הקבועים הפוסלין את הקדשים ונפדים עליהן אם נפל אחד מהן בבכור הרי זה נשחט עליו בכ"מ וכבר ביארנו אותן המומין בהלכות איסור מזבח שהראוי מהן להיות בזכר ששים ושבעה:
2 All of the conditions mentioned there which cause a sacrifice to be considered as less than desirable and hence, due to them, a consecrated animal is not offered, but also is not redeemed cause a firstborn not to be slaughtered due to them, nor offered. Instead, the animal remains until it contracts a permanent blemish. Similarly, if a firstborn contracts a temporary blemish, it should not be slaughtered in any place, nor should it be offered. Instead, it should pasture until it contracts a permanent blemish and is slaughtered because of it.בוכל הדברים שמנינו שם שאין הקרבן מן המובחר ואין הקדשים קרבין בהן ולא נפדין עליהן כך אין הבכור נשחט עליהן ולא קרב אלא יהיה עומד עד שיולד לו מום קבוע וכן אם נולד בבכור מום עובר הרי זה אינו נשחט בכל מקום ולא קרב אלא יהיה רועה עד שיפול בו מום קבוע וישחט עליו:
3 Similarly, if a transgression was performed with it or it killed a human according to the testimony of only one witness or the owner, it was set aside to be worshiped as a false deity or it was worshiped, it should be left to pasture until it contracts a disqualifying blemish, as explained in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach.גוכן אם נעבדה בו עבירה או שהרג בעד אחד או על פי הבעלים או שהוקצה או נעבד ירעה עד שיפול בו מום כמו שביארנו בהלכות איסור מזבח:
4 Neither an animal born through Cesarean section, nor one born afterwards are considered as firstborn animals. The first is not, because it is not the first issue of the womb. And the second is not, because the first preceded it. Even if a female was born through Cesarean section and a male later emerged from the womb, it is not a firstborn.דיוצא דופן והבא אחריו שניהן אינן בכור הראשון מפני שאינו פטר רחם והאחרון מפני שקדמו אחר אפילו יצאה נקבה דרך דופן וזכר דרך רחם אינו בכור:
5 When a firstborn animal is an androgynus, it does not have any sacred quality associated with it. It is like a female, concerning which the priest has no claim at all. One may perform labor with it and shear it like other ordinary animals.
When an animal is born as a tumtum, it is considered as a firstborn of doubtful status. It may be eaten by its owner after it contracts a blemish. This applies whether it urinates from a place that appears to indicate that it is male or it urinates from a place that appears to indicate that it is female.הבכור שהוא אנדרוגינוס אין בו קדושה כלל והרי הוא כנקבה שאין בו לכהן כלום ועובדים בו וגוזזים אותו כשאר החולין נולד טומטום הרי זה ספק בכור ויאכל במומו לבעליו בין שהטיל מים ממקום זכרות בין שהטיל ממקום נקבות:
When an animal is born as a tumtum, it is considered as a firstborn of doubtful status. It may be eaten by its owner after it contracts a blemish. This applies whether it urinates from a place that appears to indicate that it is male or it urinates from a place that appears to indicate that it is female.הבכור שהוא אנדרוגינוס אין בו קדושה כלל והרי הוא כנקבה שאין בו לכהן כלום ועובדים בו וגוזזים אותו כשאר החולין נולד טומטום הרי זה ספק בכור ויאכל במומו לבעליו בין שהטיל מים ממקום זכרות בין שהטיל ממקום נקבות:
6 When a sheep gives birth to an offspring that appears like a goat or a goat gives birth to an offspring that appears like a lamb, it is exempt from the mitzvah of a firstborn, as indicated by Numbers 18:17 which speaks of "the firstborn of an ox." Implied is that it must be an ox and the firstborn must be an ox.
If it has some of the distinguishing characteristics of its mother, it is considered as a firstborn and it is considered as having a permanent blemish, for there is no blemish greater than a deviation from the norms of creation, as explained in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach.
Even if a cow gives birth to an offspring that resembles a donkey, but it has some of the signs of a cow, it is a firstborn that must be given to a priest. The rationale is that, with regard to the species of donkeys, there is a concept of a firstborn. If, however, it gave birth to an offspring resembling a horse or a camel, even if it has some of the signs of a cow, it is merely a firstborn of doubtful status. Therefore it may be eaten by its owners. If, however, a priest takes possession of it, it is not expropriated from his possession.ורחל שילדה כמין עז או עז שילדה כמין רחל פטור מן הבכורה שנאמר אך בכור שור עד שיהיה הוא שור ובכורו שור ואם היה בו מקצת סימני אמו הרי זה בכור והוא בעל מום קבוע שאין לך מום גדול משינוי ברייתו אפילו פרה שילדה כמין חמור ויש בו מקצת סימני פרה הרי זה בכור לכהן הואיל ומין החמור יש בו דין בכור אבל אם ילדה מין סוס או גמל אף על פי שיש בו מקצת סימני פרה הרי הוא ספק בכור לפיכך יאכל לבעלים ואם תפסו כהן אין מוציאין מידו:
If it has some of the distinguishing characteristics of its mother, it is considered as a firstborn and it is considered as having a permanent blemish, for there is no blemish greater than a deviation from the norms of creation, as explained in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach.
Even if a cow gives birth to an offspring that resembles a donkey, but it has some of the signs of a cow, it is a firstborn that must be given to a priest. The rationale is that, with regard to the species of donkeys, there is a concept of a firstborn. If, however, it gave birth to an offspring resembling a horse or a camel, even if it has some of the signs of a cow, it is merely a firstborn of doubtful status. Therefore it may be eaten by its owners. If, however, a priest takes possession of it, it is not expropriated from his possession.ורחל שילדה כמין עז או עז שילדה כמין רחל פטור מן הבכורה שנאמר אך בכור שור עד שיהיה הוא שור ובכורו שור ואם היה בו מקצת סימני אמו הרי זה בכור והוא בעל מום קבוע שאין לך מום גדול משינוי ברייתו אפילו פרה שילדה כמין חמור ויש בו מקצת סימני פרה הרי זה בכור לכהן הואיל ומין החמור יש בו דין בכור אבל אם ילדה מין סוס או גמל אף על פי שיש בו מקצת סימני פרה הרי הוא ספק בכור לפיכך יאכל לבעלים ואם תפסו כהן אין מוציאין מידו:
7 When a person imparts a blemish to a firstborn animal, since he performed a transgression, he is penalized. License is not granted to slaughter the firstborn because of this blemish until it contracts another blemish on its own accord. If, however, this transgressor dies, his son may slaughter the animal because of the blemish inflicted by his father, for his son was not penalized after him.זהמטיל מום בבכור הואיל ועשה עבירה קונסין אותו ואינו נשחט על מום זה עד שיפול בו מום אחר מאליו ואם מת זה החוטא מותר לבנו לשחטו על מום שעשה אביו שלא קנסו בנו אחריו:
8 If one indirectly caused a firstborn to contract a physical blemish, e.g., one placed a fig on its ear, leaving it there until a dog came and took it and cut off its ear, he caused it to pass through jagged iron and pieces of glass so that its forefoot would be cut off and it was cut off, or he told a gentile to blemish it, the animal should not be slaughtered because of this blemish.
This is the general principle: Whenever a blemish was brought about with a person's knowledge, it is forbidden for him to slaughter it because of this blemish. If it was brought about without his knowledge, it is permitted for him to slaughter it because of this blemish.חהרגיל לבכור שיפול בו מום כגון שנתן דבילה על אזנו עד שבא כלב ונטלה וחתך אזנו או שהלך בין ברזל ועששיות של זכוכית כדי שתקטע ידו ונקטעה או שאמר לנכרי להטיל בו מום הרי זה לא ישחוט עליו זה הכלל כל מום שנעשה לדעתו אסור לו לשחוט עליו ואם נעשה שלא לדעתו הרי זה שוחט עליו:
This is the general principle: Whenever a blemish was brought about with a person's knowledge, it is forbidden for him to slaughter it because of this blemish. If it was brought about without his knowledge, it is permitted for him to slaughter it because of this blemish.חהרגיל לבכור שיפול בו מום כגון שנתן דבילה על אזנו עד שבא כלב ונטלה וחתך אזנו או שהלך בין ברזל ועששיות של זכוכית כדי שתקטע ידו ונקטעה או שאמר לנכרי להטיל בו מום הרי זה לא ישחוט עליו זה הכלל כל מום שנעשה לדעתו אסור לו לשחוט עליו ואם נעשה שלא לדעתו הרי זה שוחט עליו:
9 If one said: "If this firstborn animal would contract a blemish, I would slaughter it" and a gentile heard and caused it to become blemished, he may slaughter it, because it was not brought about with his knowledge.טאמר אילו נפל בבכור זה מום הייתי שוחטו ושמע הנכרי ועשה בו מום הרי זה שוחט עליו שהרי לא נעשה בדעתו:
10 If we saw a person perform a deed that would indirectly cause a firstborn to contract a blemish, it contracted a blemish, but we do not know whether he intended that this blemish be caused, he should not slaughter the firstborn, because of it.
What is implied? He placed barley in a narrow place where the walls were studded with thorns, when the firstborn ate the barley, its lip became split. Even if the owner was a Torah sage, he should not slaughter the firstborn because of it. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.יראינוהו שעשה מעשה המרגיל להטיל בו מום ונפל בו מום ואין אנו יודעין אם נתכוון למום זה או לא נתכוון הרי זה לא ישחוט עליו כיצד כגון שנתן לו שעורים במקום דחוק מסורג בקוצים וכיון שאכל נחלק שפתו אפילו היה חבר הרי זה לא ישחוט עליו וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
What is implied? He placed barley in a narrow place where the walls were studded with thorns, when the firstborn ate the barley, its lip became split. Even if the owner was a Torah sage, he should not slaughter the firstborn because of it. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.יראינוהו שעשה מעשה המרגיל להטיל בו מום ונפל בו מום ואין אנו יודעין אם נתכוון למום זה או לא נתכוון הרי זה לא ישחוט עליו כיצד כגון שנתן לו שעורים במקום דחוק מסורג בקוצים וכיון שאכל נחלק שפתו אפילו היה חבר הרי זה לא ישחוט עליו וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
11 If a firstborn animal was pursuing a person and he kicked it to divert it, or even if he kicked it because it pursued once before, should he have caused a blemish when he kicked it, he may slaughter the firstborn because of it.יאהיה בכור רודף את האדם ובעטו כדי לטרדו ואפילו בעט בו מפני שרדפו מקודם ונעשה בו מום בבעיטה זו הרי זה ישחט עליו:
12 When children caused a firstborn to become blemished through sport and similarly, if a gentile caused a blemish intentionally, the firstborn may be slaughtered because of it. If they did so in order to cause it to be permitted, it may not be slaughtered because of it.יבקטנים שהטילו מום בבכור דרך שחוק וכן הנכרי שעשה לדעתו הרי זה ישחוט עליו ואם עשו כדי להתירו לא ישחוט עליו:
13 When the blood of a firstborn ceased flowing freely, its blood may be let, provided one does not intentionally cause a blemish. If a blemish was caused through the bloodletting, the animal may be slaughtered because of it.יגבכור שאחזו דם יקיז ובלבד שלא יתכוין לעשות בו מום ואם נעשה בו מום בהקזה זו הרי זה נשחט עליו:
14 It is permitted to cause a firstborn animal to become blemished before it emerges into the world and the firstborn may be slaughtered as a consequence.
When does this apply? When the Temple is not standing. Then leniency is granted, because ultimately the animal will be eaten after it becomes blemished. When, however, the Temple is standing, this is forbidden.ידמותר להטיל מום בבכור קודם שיצא לאויר העולם וישחט עליו במה דברים אמורים בזמן הזה שאין שם בית מפני שסופו להאכל במומו אבל בזמן שבית המקדש קיים אסור:
When does this apply? When the Temple is not standing. Then leniency is granted, because ultimately the animal will be eaten after it becomes blemished. When, however, the Temple is standing, this is forbidden.ידמותר להטיל מום בבכור קודם שיצא לאויר העולם וישחט עליו במה דברים אמורים בזמן הזה שאין שם בית מפני שסופו להאכל במומו אבל בזמן שבית המקדש קיים אסור:
15 When one witness testifies in the name of another witness that a blemish was not brought about knowingly, his word is accepted. Even a woman's word is accepted if she says: "This blemish was caused on its own accord in my presence," and the animal may be slaughtered.טועד שהעיד מפי עד אחר שמום זה נפל שלא לדעת נאמן אפילו אשה נאמנת לומר בפני נפל מום זה מאליו וישחט עליו:
16 A shepherd's word is accepted when he states that any blemish that could have been caused by human activity came about on its own accord. The animal may be slaughtered because of such blemishes.
When does the above apply? When the shepherd was an Israelite and the firstborn animal is in the possession of a priest. If, however, the shepherd was a priest and the firstborn was still in the possession of its Israelite owner, the shepherd's word is not accepted and we suspect that perhaps he caused it to become blemished so that it would be given to him.טזכל המומין הראויין לבא בידי אדם נאמן הרועה עליהן לומר מאליהן נפלו ולא נעשו בכוונה וישחט עליהן בד"א כשהיה הרועה ישראל והבכור ביד הכהן אבל אם היה הרועה כהן והבכור עדיין הוא ביד בעליו הישראלי הרי זה אינו נאמן וחושדין אותו שמא הוא הטיל בו מום כדי שיתננו לו:
When does the above apply? When the shepherd was an Israelite and the firstborn animal is in the possession of a priest. If, however, the shepherd was a priest and the firstborn was still in the possession of its Israelite owner, the shepherd's word is not accepted and we suspect that perhaps he caused it to become blemished so that it would be given to him.טזכל המומין הראויין לבא בידי אדם נאמן הרועה עליהן לומר מאליהן נפלו ולא נעשו בכוונה וישחט עליהן בד"א כשהיה הרועה ישראל והבכור ביד הכהן אבל אם היה הרועה כהן והבכור עדיין הוא ביד בעליו הישראלי הרי זה אינו נאמן וחושדין אותו שמא הוא הטיל בו מום כדי שיתננו לו:
17 The word of a priest who testifies on behalf of another priest that a firstborn became blemished on its own accord is accepted. We do not suspect that they are acting in collusion with each other.
The rationale is that all of the priests are suspect to cause a blemish to a firstborn so that they can partake of it outside the Temple Courtyard. Therefore their own word is not accepted with regard to their own concerns. A colleague may, however, testify on his behalf, because a person will not transgress on behalf of another. Even a priest's children and the members of his household may testify with regard to a firstborn on his behalf. His wife may not, however, because she is considered as his own person.יזכהן שהעיד לכהן אחר שמום זה מאליו נפל נאמן ואין חוששין להן שמא הם גומלים זה את זה שכל הכהנים חשודין להטיל מום בבכור כדי לאכלו בחוץ ולפיכך אין נאמנין על ידי עצמן אבל חבירו מעיד לו שאין אדם חוטא לאחר אפילו בניו ובני ביתו של כהן מעידין לו על הבכור אבל לא אשתו מפני שהיא כגופו:
The rationale is that all of the priests are suspect to cause a blemish to a firstborn so that they can partake of it outside the Temple Courtyard. Therefore their own word is not accepted with regard to their own concerns. A colleague may, however, testify on his behalf, because a person will not transgress on behalf of another. Even a priest's children and the members of his household may testify with regard to a firstborn on his behalf. His wife may not, however, because she is considered as his own person.יזכהן שהעיד לכהן אחר שמום זה מאליו נפל נאמן ואין חוששין להן שמא הם גומלים זה את זה שכל הכהנים חשודין להטיל מום בבכור כדי לאכלו בחוץ ולפיכך אין נאמנין על ידי עצמן אבל חבירו מעיד לו שאין אדם חוטא לאחר אפילו בניו ובני ביתו של כהן מעידין לו על הבכור אבל לא אשתו מפני שהיא כגופו:
18 Leniency is, however, shown in the following instance. A firstborn animal was in the possession of a priest and it became blemished. One witness testified that the blemish came as a matter of course, but we do not know whether the blemish is of the type that enables a firstborn to be slaughtered or not. If the priest who is in possession of the firstborn states that he showed this blemish to an expert and he permitted the firstborn to be slaughtered because of it, his word is accepted. We do not suspect that he did not show the animal to the expert and that the firstborn is considered as unblemished. For the priests were not suspected of slaughtering consecrated animals outside the Temple Courtyard, because this is a sin punishable by karet, as we explained.יחבכור שהיה ביד כהן ונפל בו מום והעיד עליו עד אחד שזה המום מאליו נפל ואין אנו יודעים אם מום זה שוחטין עליו את הבכור או אין שוחטין עליו ובא הכהן שהוא בידו ואמר הראיתי מום זה למומחה והתירו לשחיטה הרי זה נאמן ואין חוששין שמא לא הראהו ושמא בכור תם הוא שלא נחשדו לשחוט קדשים בחוץ מפני שהוא עון כרת כמו שביארנו:
19 Similarly, a priest's word is accepted if he states concerning a blemished firstborn animal: "An Israelite gave me this firstborn animal after it was blemished. It did not become blemished in my domain." As a result, we do not suspect that he caused the blemish. The rationale is that the matter will inevitably become revealed and the priest will be scared to lie, lest the Israelite owner be asked and state: "It was unblemished at the time it was given to him."יטוכן נאמן הכהן לומר על בכור מום בכור זה נתנו לי ישראל במומו ולא נפל ברשותי כדי לחוש לו שמא הוא הטילו שהדבר עשוי להגלות והוא מתיירא שמא ישאלו בעליו ויאמר תמים היה בעת שנתנוהו לו:
Bechorot - Perek 3
1 A firstborn animal may not be slaughtered because of its blemish unless a ruling to that effect was delivered by an expert who was authorized to do so by the nasi and told by him: "Give license for slaughter of firstborn animals because of their blemishes." Even if a blemish was large and obvious to everyone, license to slaughter it should not be granted by anyone other than an expert who was granted authority.
Such an expert may inspect all firstborn animals except his own.אאין שוחטין את הבכור אלא על פי מומחה שנתן לו הנשיא שבארץ ישראל רשות ואמר לו התר בכורות במומן אפילו היה מום גדול וגלוי לכל לא יתירו אלא מומחה שנטל רשות וכל הבכורות אדם רואה חוץ מבכורי עצמו:
Such an expert may inspect all firstborn animals except his own.אאין שוחטין את הבכור אלא על פי מומחה שנתן לו הנשיא שבארץ ישראל רשות ואמר לו התר בכורות במומן אפילו היה מום גדול וגלוי לכל לא יתירו אלא מומחה שנטל רשות וכל הבכורות אדם רואה חוץ מבכורי עצמו:
2 If there is no expert in a locale and the blemish was one of the blemishes that are obvious and distinct, e.g., the animal's eye was blinded, its forefoot was cut off, or its hindfoot was broken, it may be slaughtered with license of three members of the synagogue. Similarly, if a firstborn animal was taken to the Diaspora and contracted a distinct blemish, license for its slaughter can be granted by three members of the synagogue.באם אין שם מומחה והיה המום מן המומין הגלויין המובהקין כגון שנסמית עינו או נקטעה ידו או נשברה רגלו הרי זה ישחט על פי שלשה בני הכנסת וכן בכור שיצא לחוצה לארץ ונפל בו מום מובהק הרי זה יותר על פי שלשה בני הכנסת:
3 An expert should not inspect a firstborn animal in Eretz Yisrael unless he is accompanied by a priest, lest the expert tell the owner: "It is a blemish and it is permitted to slaughter the animal because of it," and he slaughter it for himself without giving it to the priest. For although he is not suspect to slaughter sanctified animalsoutside the Temple Courtyard, he is suspect to steal the presents given to the priests.
Therefore if the owner was a wise man who is known to be careful in his observance, an animal may be inspected for him without a priest. If the blemish was something obvious to all, e.g., the firstborn's foreleg or hindleg was cut off, since he brought to a sage expert for inspection, we assume that he is careful in his observance. Hence the experts inspects the animal for him even though he is not accompanied by a priest.גאין רואין את הבכור לישראל עד שיהיה כהן עמו שמא יאמר לו המומחה מום הוא ומותר לשחוט עליו וילך וישחטנו לעצמו ולא יתננו לכהן שאע"פ שאינו חשוד לאכול קדשים בחוץ חשוד הוא לגזול מתנות כהונה לפיכך אם היה חכם וידוע שהוא מדקדק על עצמו רואין לו היה המום גלוי לכל כגון שנקטעה ידו או רגלו הואיל והביאו לחכם המומחה הרי זה בחזקת מדקדק על עצמו לפיכך רואין לו אף על פי שאין עמו כהן:
Therefore if the owner was a wise man who is known to be careful in his observance, an animal may be inspected for him without a priest. If the blemish was something obvious to all, e.g., the firstborn's foreleg or hindleg was cut off, since he brought to a sage expert for inspection, we assume that he is careful in his observance. Hence the experts inspects the animal for him even though he is not accompanied by a priest.גאין רואין את הבכור לישראל עד שיהיה כהן עמו שמא יאמר לו המומחה מום הוא ומותר לשחוט עליו וילך וישחטנו לעצמו ולא יתננו לכהן שאע"פ שאינו חשוד לאכול קדשים בחוץ חשוד הוא לגזול מתנות כהונה לפיכך אם היה חכם וידוע שהוא מדקדק על עצמו רואין לו היה המום גלוי לכל כגון שנקטעה ידו או רגלו הואיל והביאו לחכם המומחה הרי זה בחזקת מדקדק על עצמו לפיכך רואין לו אף על פי שאין עמו כהן:
4 When a person slaughters a firstborn animal and afterwards shows its blemish to an expert - even if the blemish is overtly recognizable and will not be affected by ritual slaughter, e.g., its foreleg or hindleg were cut off - since it was not slaughtered with license granted by an expert - it is forbidden to benefit from it and it should be buried like a firstborn animal that died.דהשוחט את הבכור ואחר כך הראה את מומו אע"פ שהוא מום גלוי שאינו משתנה בשחיטה כגון שנחתכה ידו או רגלו הואיל ונשחט שלא על פי מומחה הרי זה אסור ויקבר כבכור שמת:
5 When a firstborn had only one testicle, but two sacs, it was sat on its rear, and its genital area kneaded without finding the second testicle, an expert granted permission for its slaughter and it was slaughtered, it is permitted to be eaten even though the second testicle was found clinging to the flanks. Since its genital area was kneaded, the original ruling is not rescinded. If, however, its genital area was not kneaded, even though permission to slaughter it was granted by an expert, it must be buried.הבכור שהיתה לו ביצה אחת ושני כיסים ובדקו המומחה והושיבוהו על הרגוזו ומעכו ולא יצאת ביצה שנייה והתירו המומחה ונשחט ונמצא השנייה דבוקה בכסלים הרי זה מותר הואיל ומעכו אבל אם לא נמעך אף על פי שנשחט על פי מומחה הרי זה יקבר:
6 When a person who is not an expert inspects a firstborn and has it slaughtered, it should be buried and he must make restitution from his personal resources.
How much should he pay? A fourth of the worth of a small animal and half the worth of a large animal. Why does he not pay its entire worth? Because the owner of the animal was penalized so that he not delay offering the firstborn and so that he not raise a small animal in Eretz Yisrael.ומי שאינו מומחה וראה את הבכור ונשחט על פיו הרי זה יקבר וישלם מביתו וכמה משלם רביע לדקה ומחצה לגסה ומפני מה לא ישלם כל דמיו מפני שקנסו את בעל הבהמה כדי שלא ישהנה ולא יגדל בהמה דקה בארץ ישראל:
How much should he pay? A fourth of the worth of a small animal and half the worth of a large animal. Why does he not pay its entire worth? Because the owner of the animal was penalized so that he not delay offering the firstborn and so that he not raise a small animal in Eretz Yisrael.ומי שאינו מומחה וראה את הבכור ונשחט על פיו הרי זה יקבר וישלם מביתו וכמה משלם רביע לדקה ומחצה לגסה ומפני מה לא ישלם כל דמיו מפני שקנסו את בעל הבהמה כדי שלא ישהנה ולא יגדל בהמה דקה בארץ ישראל:
7 When a person receives a wage for inspecting a firstborn animal for a blemish, the animal may not be slaughtered on the basis of his rulings unless he was a great expert and the sages knew that there were none like him and they allotted a fee to him for the visit and inspection whether a blemish was found or not.He should not take a fee for any given animal more than once and should continue to inspect it as long as it is brought to him, so that no suspicions will be aroused.זהנוטל שכרו להיות רואה בכורות אין שוחטין על פיו אלא אם כן היה מומחה גדול וידעו בו חכמים שאין כמותו ופסקו לו שכר על הראייה והבקור בין שנמצא בו מום בין שנמצא תמים ולא יטול שכר על בהמה זו חוץ מפעם אחת ורואה אותה לעולם כל זמן שמביאין אותה כדי שלא יבוא לידי חשד:
8 When a person is suspect to sell firstborn animals as ordinary animals, one may not purchase even the meat of deer from him, because it resembles the meat of a calf. One may not purchase from him hides that have not been processed, even the hides of a female animal, lest he cut off the place of the male organ and say: "This is the hide of a female animal."
One may not purchase wool from him, even wool that has been whitened. Needless to say, this refers to wool that is still soiled. We may, however, purchase from him spun wool, rolls of wool and processed hides. The rationale is that one will not process the hide from an unblemished firstborn animal, because he fears to leave it in his domain, lest the judges hear and penalize him according to his wickedness.חהחשוד על הבכורות למוכרן לשם חולין אין לוקחין ממנו אפילו בשר צבאים מפני שהוא דומה לבשר עגל ואין לוקחים ממנו עורות שאינן עבודים אפילו של נקבה שמא יחתוך זכרותו ויאמר עור נקבה הוא ואין לוקחין ממנו צמר אפילו מלובן ואין צריך לומר צואי אבל לוקחין ממנו טווי ולבדין ועורות עבודים שאינו מעבד עור בכור תמים מפני שהוא מפחד לשהותו אצלו שמא ישמעו הדיינים ויקנסוהו כפי רשעו:
One may not purchase wool from him, even wool that has been whitened. Needless to say, this refers to wool that is still soiled. We may, however, purchase from him spun wool, rolls of wool and processed hides. The rationale is that one will not process the hide from an unblemished firstborn animal, because he fears to leave it in his domain, lest the judges hear and penalize him according to his wickedness.חהחשוד על הבכורות למוכרן לשם חולין אין לוקחין ממנו אפילו בשר צבאים מפני שהוא דומה לבשר עגל ואין לוקחים ממנו עורות שאינן עבודים אפילו של נקבה שמא יחתוך זכרותו ויאמר עור נקבה הוא ואין לוקחין ממנו צמר אפילו מלובן ואין צריך לומר צואי אבל לוקחין ממנו טווי ולבדין ועורות עבודים שאינו מעבד עור בכור תמים מפני שהוא מפחד לשהותו אצלו שמא ישמעו הדיינים ויקנסוהו כפי רשעו:
9 When one slaughtered a firstborn and sold its meat and afterwards, it became known that he did not show it to an expert, what was eaten was eaten. The owner should, however, return the money paid by the purchasers. What was not eaten should be burned and the money returned. This law also applies when one feeds meat from an animal that is treifah, as will be explained in Hilchot Mikach UMemcar.טהשוחט את הבכור ומכרו ונודע שלא הראהו למומחה מה שאכלו אכלו ויחזיר להם את הדמים ומה שלא נאכל יקבר ויחזיר את הדמים וכן הדין במאכיל את הטרפה כמו שיתבאר בהלכות מקח וממכר:
10 The following rules apply when it is discovered that a firstborn was treifah. If it was unblemished and it was discovered to be treifah after it was skinned, the hide should be burnt, as explained in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim, and the meat should be buried. If it was slaughtered because of a blemish, the meat should be buried and the priests should be allowed to benefit from its hide, provided it was slaughtered on the basis of the ruling of an expert.יבכור שנמצא טרפה אם תמים הוא ונמצא טריפה אחר שהופשט העור ישרף כמו שביארנו בהלכות פסולי המוקדשין והבשר יקבר ואם במומו נשחט הבשר יקבר ויהנו הכהנים בעורו והוא שנשחט על פי מומחה:
11 When the meat of a firstborn animal, whether unblemished or blemished, has been eaten according to law, just as it is permitted to benefit from its hide, so too, is it permitted to benefit from its shearings. Nevertheless, it is forbidden to benefit from any wool which is cut off from it while it is alive - and even from wool that it shed, and even to wool that was shed after the animal contracted a blemish. Even after it was slaughtered, and, needless to say, after it died, the wool remains forbidden. For the same wool that was shed from the animal during its lifetime remains forbidden even after these events take place. These same laws apply with regard to the tithes of animals.
We have already explained in Hilchot Me'ilah that this decree was instituted only with regard to the firstborn and tithe sacrifices, because they do not come to secure atonement. Hence with regard to these sacrifices, there is room to suspect that the owner will leave them in his domain to take all the wool that sheds from them. This is undesirable, because as we have already explained, it is a mitzvah to eat the firstborn in the first year of its life, whether it is unblemished or blemished.יאהבכור שנאכל בשרו כהלכה בין תמים בין בעל מום כשם שמותר ליהנות בעורו כך נהנין בגיזותיו אבל כל צמר שנגזז ממנו כשהוא חי אפילו נשר הרי הוא אסור בהנאה ואפילו נשר ממנו אחר שנפל בו מום ואפילו אחר שחיטתו ואין צריך לומר אחר מיתתו שהרי אותו הצמר שנשר ממנו מחיים באיסורו עומד וכן במעשר בהמה וכבר ביארנו בהלכות מעילה שלא גזרו גזירה זו אלא על הבכור ועל המעשר בלבד מפני שאינן באין לכפרה שמא ישהם אצלו כדי ליקח כל הצמר שנישור מהם וכבר ביארנו שמצוה לאכלו תוך שנתו בין תמים בין בעל מום:
We have already explained in Hilchot Me'ilah that this decree was instituted only with regard to the firstborn and tithe sacrifices, because they do not come to secure atonement. Hence with regard to these sacrifices, there is room to suspect that the owner will leave them in his domain to take all the wool that sheds from them. This is undesirable, because as we have already explained, it is a mitzvah to eat the firstborn in the first year of its life, whether it is unblemished or blemished.יאהבכור שנאכל בשרו כהלכה בין תמים בין בעל מום כשם שמותר ליהנות בעורו כך נהנין בגיזותיו אבל כל צמר שנגזז ממנו כשהוא חי אפילו נשר הרי הוא אסור בהנאה ואפילו נשר ממנו אחר שנפל בו מום ואפילו אחר שחיטתו ואין צריך לומר אחר מיתתו שהרי אותו הצמר שנשר ממנו מחיים באיסורו עומד וכן במעשר בהמה וכבר ביארנו בהלכות מעילה שלא גזרו גזירה זו אלא על הבכור ועל המעשר בלבד מפני שאינן באין לכפרה שמא ישהם אצלו כדי ליקח כל הצמר שנישור מהם וכבר ביארנו שמצוה לאכלו תוך שנתו בין תמים בין בעל מום:
12 The following rules apply when a firstborn has loose-hanging wooland it was slaughtered because of its blemish. It is permitted to benefit from the loose-hanging wool that resembles the animal's other wool. It is, however, forbidden to benefit from the loose-hanging wool that does not resemble the animal's other wool, i.e., its roots are turned in the opposite direction and face its tips, for this is considered as if it were shed while the animal was alive.יבבכור שהיה בו צמר מדובלל ושחטו את שהוא נראה עמו מן הגיזה מותר בהנאה ואת שאינו נראה עמו והוא הצמר שעיקרו הפוך כלפי ראשו אסור שזה כמו שנשר מחיים:
13 When the shearings of the wool from a firstborn animal, even one that was blemished, become intermingled with the shearings of ordinary animals - even one with several thousand - they are all forbidden. The rationale is that the shearings are a significant entity and even the slightest amount causes the entire mixture to be considered as consecrated.
When one weaves a full length of a sit of wool from a firstborn animal in a garment, it should be destroyed by burning. If wool from consecrated animals was used, even the slightest amount causes the entire garment to be consecrated.יגגיזת בכור אפילו בעל מום שנתערבה בגיזי חולין אפילו אחת בכמה אלפים הכל אסורים הרי הוא דבר חשוב ומקדש בכל שהוא האורג מלא הסיט מצמר הבכור בבגד ידלק מצמר המוקדשין מקדש בכל שהוא:
When one weaves a full length of a sit of wool from a firstborn animal in a garment, it should be destroyed by burning. If wool from consecrated animals was used, even the slightest amount causes the entire garment to be consecrated.יגגיזת בכור אפילו בעל מום שנתערבה בגיזי חולין אפילו אחת בכמה אלפים הכל אסורים הרי הוא דבר חשוב ומקדש בכל שהוא האורג מלא הסיט מצמר הבכור בבגד ידלק מצמר המוקדשין מקדש בכל שהוא:
Bechorot - Perek 4
1 There is an obligation to apply the laws of a firstborn to an animal owned by partners. The terms "your cattle and your sheep" was used only to exclude an animal owned in partnership with a gentile. For if a gentile was a partner in the ownership of a cow or of the fetus it is carrying - even if the gentile owns only a thousandth share of the mother or the offspring, it is exempt from the requirements pertaining to the firstborn.
If the gentile owned one specific limb of one of them, e.g., a forefoot or a hindfoot, any limb which if cut off that limb would render the animal as blemished, exempts it. If the limb owned by the gentile could be cut off without disqualifying the animal as a firstborn, it is obligated in the laws of the firstborn.אבהמת השותפין חייבת בבכורה לא נאמר בקרך וצאנך אלא למעט שותפות הנכרי שאם היה שותף בפרה או בעובר אפילו היה לנכרי אחד מאלף באם או בולד הרי זה פטור מן הבכורה היה לו באחד משניהם אבר אחד כגון יד או רגל רואין כל שאילו יחתך והיה בעל מום הרי זה פטור ואם אפשר שיחתך אבר הנכרי ולא יפסל הרי זה חייב בבכורה:
If the gentile owned one specific limb of one of them, e.g., a forefoot or a hindfoot, any limb which if cut off that limb would render the animal as blemished, exempts it. If the limb owned by the gentile could be cut off without disqualifying the animal as a firstborn, it is obligated in the laws of the firstborn.אבהמת השותפין חייבת בבכורה לא נאמר בקרך וצאנך אלא למעט שותפות הנכרי שאם היה שותף בפרה או בעובר אפילו היה לנכרי אחד מאלף באם או בולד הרי זה פטור מן הבכורה היה לו באחד משניהם אבר אחד כגון יד או רגל רואין כל שאילו יחתך והיה בעל מום הרי זה פטור ואם אפשר שיחתך אבר הנכרי ולא יפסל הרי זה חייב בבכורה:
2 When a person purchases a fetus being carried by a cow owned by a gentile or he sells a fetus being carried by his cow to a gentile, even though he is not permitted to do so, the fetus is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn. He is not penalized because of this matter.בהלוקח עובר פרתו של נכרי או המוכר עובר פרתו לנכרי אע"פ שאינו רשאי הרי זה פטור מן הבכורה ואין קונסין אותו על דבר זה:
3 When a person receives an animal from a gentile to care for it and the offspring would be shared or a gentile receives an animal from a Jew under such an arrangement, the offspring are exempt from the requirements of firstborn animals.This is implied by Exodus 13:2: "All the first issue of the womb among the children of Israel," i.e., everything must belong to a Jew.גהמקבל בהמה מן הנכרי להיות מטפל בה והולדות ביניהם או נכרי שקבל מישראל כזה הרי אלו פטורים מן הבכורה שנאמר פטר כל רחם בבני ישראל עד שיהיה הכל מישראל:
4 The following laws apply when a Jew receives sheep from a gentile at a fixed price and agreed that the profit will be split between them, but if the worth of the animal is reduced, the loss is born by the Jew alone. Even though the sheep are in the domain of the Jew and are his property, since if the gentile will not find any other resources to collect his debt for the lost sheep from him, he will take these sheep and their offspring, it is considered as if he has a lien on them and their offspring. Thus the gentile is considered as having a share of them and they and their offspring are exempt from the requirements of the firstborn. The offspring of their offspring, however, are liable for they belong to the Jew and the gentile has no authority over them.דהמקבל צאן מן הנכרי בממון קצוב ופסק עמו שיהיה השכר ביניהם ואם פיחתו פיחתו לישראל אע"פשברשות ישראל הם והרי הם כקניינו הואיל ואם לא ימצא הנכרי אצלו ממון אחר לגבות ממנו יגבה מן הבהמות האלו ומולדותיהן נעשה כמו שיש לו אחריות עליהן ועל ולדותיהן והרי יד הנכרי באמצע ופטורין מן הבכורה הם וולדותיהן אבל ולדי ולדות חייבין שהרי של ישראל הם ואין לנכרי רשות עליהן:
5 When a Jews pays money to a gentile and thus acquires an animal from a gentile according to their law, even though he did not perform meshichah,he acquires the animal and the requirements of the firstborn apply to its offspring. Similarly, if a gentile acquired an animal from a Jew according to their laws and paid money, he acquires it even though he did not perform meshichah and its offspring are exempt from the requirements of the firstborn.הישראל שנתן מעות לנכרי וקנה לו בהן בהמה מנכרי בדיניהן אף על פי שלא משך קנה וחייבת בבכורה וכן אם קנה הנכרי מישראל בדיניהם ונתן מעות אף על פי שלא משך קנה ופטורה מבכורה:
6 When a gentile converts and it is not known whether his cow gave birth before he converted or afterwards, it is considered a firstborn because of the doubt.וגר שנתגייר ואין ידוע אם עד שלא נתגייר ילדה פרתו או אחר שנתגייר הרי זה בכור מספק:
7 When a person purchases an animal from a gentile and does not know whether it gave birth already or not, if it gives birth in his possession, the offspring is considered a firstborn because of the doubt. It should be eaten by its masters after it becomes blemished, but is not given to a priest. The rationale is that when a person desires to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff.זהלוקח בהמה מן הנכרי ואין ידוע אם בכרה או לא בכרה וילדה אצלו הרי זה ספק בכור ויאכל במומו לבעלים ואינו לכהן שהמוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה:
8 When a person purchases an animal that is giving suck from a gentile, he need not suspect that it is giving suck to the offspring of another animal. Instead, we operate under the assumption that it has already given birth. Even if the animal to which it is giving suck is like another species, even if it is like a pig, it is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn.
Similarly, the offspring of an animal that is providing milk is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn. The rationale is that we rely on the assumption that most animals do not provide milk unless they have given birth previously.חלקח בהמה מניקה מן הנכרי אינו חושש שמא בנה של אחרת היא מניקה אלא הרי זו בחזקת שילדה ואפילו היה זה שמניקה כמו מין אחר ואפילו כמין חזיר הרי זו פטורה מן הבכורה וכן בהמה שהיא חולבת פטורה מן הבכורה שרוב הבהמות אינן חולבות אא"כ כבר ילדו:
Similarly, the offspring of an animal that is providing milk is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn. The rationale is that we rely on the assumption that most animals do not provide milk unless they have given birth previously.חלקח בהמה מניקה מן הנכרי אינו חושש שמא בנה של אחרת היא מניקה אלא הרי זו בחזקת שילדה ואפילו היה זה שמניקה כמו מין אחר ואפילו כמין חזיר הרי זו פטורה מן הבכורה וכן בהמה שהיא חולבת פטורה מן הבכורה שרוב הבהמות אינן חולבות אא"כ כבר ילדו:
9 When a person purchases an animal from a fellow Jew, we operate under the assumption that it already gave birth unless the seller states that it did not give birth yet. The rationale is that we assume a Jew will not remain silent and cause a fellow Jew to partake of a consecrated animal outside the Temple Courtyard. Hence we conclude that it certainly gave birth previously. Therefore the owner sold the mother without any qualification.טהלוקח בהמה מישראל הרי זו בחזקת שבכרה עד שיודיעו המוכר שעדיין לא ילדה שאין הישראל שותק וגורם לו לאכול קדשים בחוץ ודאי שבכרה ולפיכך מכרה סתם:
10 The following laws apply when a small animal miscarries and discharges a fetus whose form has not become very distinct and evident to all. It is called a tinuf. If the shepherds say: "It was a fetus, but its form has become marred," the future offspring of this animal is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn. It must, however, be shown to a shepherd who is knowledgeable.
Therefore if one purchases an animal from a gentile, even if it was small and gave birth within its first year of life, the offspring is considered as a firstborn of doubtful status, because it is possible that it discharged a tinuf while owned by the gentile.
Similarly, when a large animal discharges a placenta, it is a sign that it carried a fetus, for a placenta is never formed without a fetus and the offspring is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn. It is permitted to throw that fetus to the dogs for the following reasons. Only a male is sanctified as a firstborn. We assume that offspring are half male and half female. We have already explained that a male that does not have some of the distinguishing signs of its mother is not consecrated as a firstborn. Thus the lesser portion of animals' first offspring is consecrated as a firstborn. Hence since the probability is less than half, it is not considered. When, by contrast, a consecrated animal discharges a placenta, it must be buried. For the female offspring are bound by the same laws as the male.יבהמה דקה שהפילה עובר שעדיין לא נתבאר צורתו הרבה וניכרת לכל וזהו הנקרא טינוף אם אמרו הרועים עובר הוא אלא שנפסדה צורתו הרי זו פטורה מן הבכורה וצריך להראותו לרועה חכם לפיכך הלוקח בהמה מן הנכרי אפילו היתה קטנה וילדה אצלו בתוך שנתה הרי זה ספק בכור שמא טינוף הפילה ברשות הנכרי וכן בהמה גסה שהפילה שליא הרי זו סימן ולד שאין שליא בלא ולד ונפטרה מן הבכורה ומותר להשליך אותה השליא לכלבים שאין מתקדש בבכורה אלא זכר וחזקת הנולדים מחצה זכרים ומחצה נקבות וכבר ביארנו שהזכר שאין בו מקצת סימני אמו אינו מתקדש בבכורה ונמצא מיעוט הנולדין הן המתקדשין בבכורה ואין חוששין למיעוט אבל בהמת קדשים שהפילה שליא תקבר [שהנקבות בה כזכרים]:
Therefore if one purchases an animal from a gentile, even if it was small and gave birth within its first year of life, the offspring is considered as a firstborn of doubtful status, because it is possible that it discharged a tinuf while owned by the gentile.
Similarly, when a large animal discharges a placenta, it is a sign that it carried a fetus, for a placenta is never formed without a fetus and the offspring is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn. It is permitted to throw that fetus to the dogs for the following reasons. Only a male is sanctified as a firstborn. We assume that offspring are half male and half female. We have already explained that a male that does not have some of the distinguishing signs of its mother is not consecrated as a firstborn. Thus the lesser portion of animals' first offspring is consecrated as a firstborn. Hence since the probability is less than half, it is not considered. When, by contrast, a consecrated animal discharges a placenta, it must be buried. For the female offspring are bound by the same laws as the male.יבהמה דקה שהפילה עובר שעדיין לא נתבאר צורתו הרבה וניכרת לכל וזהו הנקרא טינוף אם אמרו הרועים עובר הוא אלא שנפסדה צורתו הרי זו פטורה מן הבכורה וצריך להראותו לרועה חכם לפיכך הלוקח בהמה מן הנכרי אפילו היתה קטנה וילדה אצלו בתוך שנתה הרי זה ספק בכור שמא טינוף הפילה ברשות הנכרי וכן בהמה גסה שהפילה שליא הרי זו סימן ולד שאין שליא בלא ולד ונפטרה מן הבכורה ומותר להשליך אותה השליא לכלבים שאין מתקדש בבכורה אלא זכר וחזקת הנולדים מחצה זכרים ומחצה נקבות וכבר ביארנו שהזכר שאין בו מקצת סימני אמו אינו מתקדש בבכורה ונמצא מיעוט הנולדין הן המתקדשין בבכורה ואין חוששין למיעוט אבל בהמת קדשים שהפילה שליא תקבר [שהנקבות בה כזכרים]:
11 When a large animal discharges a flow of blood, the future offspring of this animal is exempt from the requirements of the firstborn, for we assume that there was an offspring in it, but there was much more blood and it lost its form and its existence was nullified. We must bury the flow of blood like a stillborn firstborn animal, even though this flow of blood has no consecrated quality. Why is it buried? In order to publicize the matter that the offspring of this animal was exempted from the requirements of the firstborn.יאבהמה גסה שהפילה חררת דם הרי זו נפטרה מן הבכורה שחזקתה שהולד בתוכה ורבה עליו הדם והפסידו ובטלו וקוברין חררה זו כמו נפל מבכרת אע"פ שאין חררה זו קדושה ולמה קוברין אותה כדי לפרסם הדבר שנפטרה מן הבכורה:
12 We already explained with regard to the concept of a woman in the niddah state that the form of a human fetus is completed on the fortieth day after conception. Thus when a woman miscarries after less than 40 days, she is not considered to have miscarried a fetus. Our Sages did not, however, conclusively determine the amount of days in which the form of an animal fetus is completed. They did, however, say that an animal which discharges a tinufdoes not become pregnant, nor does it carry another fetus until after 30 days.יבכבר ביארנו בענין נדה שהולד באדם נגמר לארבעים יום והמפלת לפחות מארבעים אינו ולד אבל ולד בהמה לא עמדו חכמים על מניין הימים שיגמר בו אבל אמרו שהמפלת טינוף אינה מתעברת אחריו ולא מקבלת ולד אחר לפחות משלשים יום:
13 When an animal left pregnant and returned empty, her next offspring is considered as a firstborn because of the doubt involved. Perhaps what she discharged was not an entity that exempts her offspring from the requirements of the firstborn. A fetus that was miscarried is not considered to have "opened its mother's womb" unless its head was the size of top of the needle of the woof.יגבהמה שיצאה מליאה ובאה ריקנית הבא אחר כן בכור מספק שמא דבר שאינו פוטר בבכורה הפילה ואין לנפלי בהמה פטירת רחם עד שיעגילו ראש כפיקה של ערב:
14 When an animal that is having difficulty giving birth to its firstborn, the offspring may be cut up limb by limb and the limbs extracted and thrown to the dogs immediately. The offspring that follows is a firstborn.
If the greater portion of a fetus emerges at one time, it must be buried and the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn.
If one cut off a limb, extracted it, put it aside, cut off another limb, until the greater portion of the fetus is completed, all of the limbs are required to be buried and the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn. ]The rationale is that] since the greater part of the animal was taken out - whether whole or cut in pieces - and it is present before us, it becomes consecrated retroactively.ידמבכרת המקשה לילד מחתך אבר ומשליך לכלבים והבא אחריו בכור יצא רובו הרי זה יקבר ונפטרה מן הבכורה ואם חתך אבר והניחו אבר והניחו עד שהשלים רובו הרי כל האיברים צריכין קבורה ונפטרה מן הבכורה כיון שיצא רובו בין שלם בין מחותך והרי הוא לפנינו נתקדש למפרע:
If the greater portion of a fetus emerges at one time, it must be buried and the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn.
If one cut off a limb, extracted it, put it aside, cut off another limb, until the greater portion of the fetus is completed, all of the limbs are required to be buried and the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn. ]The rationale is that] since the greater part of the animal was taken out - whether whole or cut in pieces - and it is present before us, it becomes consecrated retroactively.ידמבכרת המקשה לילד מחתך אבר ומשליך לכלבים והבא אחריו בכור יצא רובו הרי זה יקבר ונפטרה מן הבכורה ואם חתך אבר והניחו אבר והניחו עד שהשלים רובו הרי כל האיברים צריכין קבורה ונפטרה מן הבכורה כיון שיצא רובו בין שלם בין מחותך והרי הוא לפנינו נתקדש למפרע:
15 When a third of the fetus emerged and it was sold to a gentile and then a second third emerged, it is consecrated retroactively and the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn.
If a third of the offspring was removed by Caesarian section and, afterwards, two thirds emerged through the womb, it is not consecrated. The rationale is that the first larger portion did not emerge from the womb and the consecration would have been brought about retroactively.טויצא שליש ומכרו לנכרי וחזר ויצא שליש אחר נתקדש למפרע ונפטרה מן הבכורה יצא שליש דרך דופן ושני שלישים דרך רחם אינו קדוש שהרוב הראשון לא יצא דרך רחם ולמפרע הוא מתקדש:
If a third of the offspring was removed by Caesarian section and, afterwards, two thirds emerged through the womb, it is not consecrated. The rationale is that the first larger portion did not emerge from the womb and the consecration would have been brought about retroactively.טויצא שליש ומכרו לנכרי וחזר ויצא שליש אחר נתקדש למפרע ונפטרה מן הבכורה יצא שליש דרך דופן ושני שלישים דרך רחם אינו קדוש שהרוב הראשון לא יצא דרך רחם ולמפרע הוא מתקדש:
16 The following laws apply when the lesser portion of one limb emerges from the womb together with the greater portion of the animal. Since the portion that emerges constitutes the greater portion of the fetus, the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn and the portion that emerged should be buried..
If only half of the fetus emerges from the womb together with the greater portion of one limb, there is an unresolved doubt whether the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn or not. Therefore the next offspring is a firstborn of doubtful status.טזיצא מיעוט אבר גדול והרי זה היוצא רובו של עובר נפטר מן הבכורה ויקבר היוצא יצא חצי העובר והוא רובו של אבר היוצא הרי זה ספק אם נפטרה מן הבכורה או לא נפטרה לפיכך הבא אחריו ספק בכור:
If only half of the fetus emerges from the womb together with the greater portion of one limb, there is an unresolved doubt whether the future offspring of the mother is exempted from the requirements of the firstborn or not. Therefore the next offspring is a firstborn of doubtful status.טזיצא מיעוט אבר גדול והרי זה היוצא רובו של עובר נפטר מן הבכורה ויקבר היוצא יצא חצי העובר והוא רובו של אבר היוצא הרי זה ספק אם נפטרה מן הבכורה או לא נפטרה לפיכך הבא אחריו ספק בכור:
17 When a firstborn was wrapped in a fiber and removed from the womb without touching the womb or it was wrapped with a placenta of another animal or it was wounded up together with its sister and emerged, since it did not touch the womb, it is considered as a firstborn of doubtful status.יזבכור שכרכו בסיב והוציאו ולא נגע ברחם או שכרכו בשליית בהמה אחרת או שנכרכה עליו אחותו ויצא הואיל ולא נגע ברחם מכל מקום הרי זה ספק בכור:
18 If one cleaved the wombs of two animals together and a fetus emerged from one and entered the other, there is an unresolved doubt: Is the future offspring of the animal to whose womb the firstborn entered exempted from the requirements of the firstborn, for its womb was "opened?" Or is it not exempted until it "opens its womb" when giving birth to its own offspring?יחהדביק שני רחמים זה לזה ויצא מזה ונכנס לזה הרי זה ספק אם נפטרה מן הבכורה הבהמה שנכנס בה הבכור שהרי פטר רחם או לא נפטרה עד שיפטור רחמה ולדה:
19 If the walls of the mother's womb opened and the firstborn emerged without touching the walls of the womb, there is an unresolved doubt: Is it consecrated because it touches the walls of the mother's womb? Or is it consecrated because it was in the space of the mother's womb?יטנפתחו כותלי בית הרחם ויצא הרי זה ספק אם נגיעת רחם מקדשת או אוירו:
20 If the walls of the the mother's womb were uprooted from their place and were suspended around the offspring's neck, there is an unresolved doubt: Do they cause the offspring to be consecrated only when they are in their place? Or do they cause it to be consecrated even if they are not in their place.כנעקרו כותלי בית הרחם [ונתלו] בצוארו הרי זה ספק אם במקומו מקדש או מקדש אף חוץ למקומו:
21 If the flesh supporting the walls of the womb decomposes, the offspring is not consecrated. If the walls of the womb are partially stripped off, but the portion that remained is greater than the portion that was stripped off and the offspring emerged through the open area or the portion that was stripped off is greater than the portion that remained and the offspring emerged through the portion that remained, the offspring is a firstborn of doubtful status.כאנגממו כותלי בית הרחם אינו קדוש נפרץ מקצתו ועומד מרובה על הפרוץ ויצא דרך הפרוץ או שהיה הפרוץ מרובה על העומד ויצא דרך העומד הרי זה ספק בכור:
Hayom Yom:
•
•
English Text | Video Class
"Today's Day"
Monday Nissan 28, 13th day of the omer 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: K'doshim, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 135-139.
Tanya: Ch. 44. Each of (p. 231)...until the morning... (p. 233).
Chassidim asked the Alter Rebbe: "Which is the superior avoda, love of G-d or love of Israel?" He replied: "Both love of G-d and love of Israel are equally engraved in every Jew's neshama, ruach, and nefesh.1 Scripture is explicit: 'I have loved you, says the L-rd.'2 It follows that love of Israel is superior - for you love whom your beloved loves."
FOOTNOTES1. Different levels or aspects of the soul. The two loves thoroughly permeate the soul on every level.2. Malachi 1:2.
"Today's Day"
Monday Nissan 28, 13th day of the omer 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: K'doshim, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 135-139.
Tanya: Ch. 44. Each of (p. 231)...until the morning... (p. 233).
Chassidim asked the Alter Rebbe: "Which is the superior avoda, love of G-d or love of Israel?" He replied: "Both love of G-d and love of Israel are equally engraved in every Jew's neshama, ruach, and nefesh.1 Scripture is explicit: 'I have loved you, says the L-rd.'2 It follows that love of Israel is superior - for you love whom your beloved loves."
FOOTNOTES1. Different levels or aspects of the soul. The two loves thoroughly permeate the soul on every level.2. Malachi 1:2.
Daily Thought
Live Clothing
There is a suit we wear that has a life of its own.
It is knitted of the fabric of words, images and sounds, mischievous characters that no one else can see—or would care to know.
You, however, hear them day and night, chattering, buzzing, playing their games in the courtyard of your mind. They are all the threads of the garment of thought that envelops you.
Leave your thoughts to play on their own, and they will take you for a ride to places you never wanted to see.
Grab the reins, master them, direct them, flex your mind, and they will follow. Provide them a script, and they will play along.
Do something quick, because you, after all, are dressed up within them.[Maamar Shoftim 5729. Tanya, chapters 4, 6, 9, 12.]-------
Live Clothing
There is a suit we wear that has a life of its own.
It is knitted of the fabric of words, images and sounds, mischievous characters that no one else can see—or would care to know.
You, however, hear them day and night, chattering, buzzing, playing their games in the courtyard of your mind. They are all the threads of the garment of thought that envelops you.
Leave your thoughts to play on their own, and they will take you for a ride to places you never wanted to see.
Grab the reins, master them, direct them, flex your mind, and they will follow. Provide them a script, and they will play along.
Do something quick, because you, after all, are dressed up within them.[Maamar Shoftim 5729. Tanya, chapters 4, 6, 9, 12.]-------
No comments:
Post a Comment