TODAY IN JUDAISM: Thursday, June 1, 2017 - Chabad.org in New York, New York, United States -Today is Thursday, Sivan 7, 5777 · May 30, 2017 - Shavuot 2nd Day
Torah Reading:
• Second Day of Shavuot
Outside of the Land of Israel, Shavuot is observed for a 2nd day today.
• Yizkor
Yizkor, the remembrance prayer for departed parents, is recited today after the morning reading of the Torah.
• Sanctification of the Moon
Once a month, as the moon waxes in the sky, we recite a special blessing called Kiddush Levanah, "the sanctification of the moon," praising the Creator for His wondrous work we call astronomy.
Kiddush Levanah is recited after nightfall, usually on Saturday night. The blessing is concluded with songs and dancing, because our nation is likened to the moon—as it waxes and wanes, so have we throughout history. When we bless the moon, we renew our trust that very soon, the light of G‑d's presence will fill all the earth and our people will be redeemed from exile.
Though Kiddush Levanah can be recited as early as three days after the moon's rebirth, the kabbalah tells us it is best to wait a full week, till the seventh of the month. Once 15 days have passed, the moon begins to wane once more and the season for saying the blessing has passed.
Links:
Brief Guide to Kiddush Levanah: Thank G‑d for the Moon!
More articles on Kiddush Levanah from our knowledgebase.
Today in Jewish History:
• Ger Tzedek of Vilna Burned at the Stake (1749)
Avraham ben Avraham, the famed "Ger Tzedek" (Righteous Convert) of Vilna, was born as Valentin Potozki, the son of Count Potocki, one of the richest landowners in Poland. As a student in Vilna he discovered Judaism and decided to convert -- a capital offense in most countries in Christian Europe at the time. He fled to Amsterdam where he secretly converted to Judaism, assuming the name Avraham ben Avraham ("Abraham the son of Abraham").
Years later he returned to Vilna, where he was eventually recognized as the missing son of Count Potocki and arrested by the church. He refused to renounce his faith and was sentenced to death. He was burned at the stake in Vilna on the 2nd day of Shavuot of 1749.
Daily Torah Study:
Numbers Chapter 7
| 1And it was that on the day that Moses finished erecting the Mishkan, he anointed it, sanctified it, and all its vessels, and the altar and all its vessels, and he anointed them and sanctified them. | | אוַיְהִ֡י בְּיוֹם֩ כַּלּ֨וֹת משֶׁ֜ה לְהָקִ֣ים אֶת־הַמִּשְׁכָּ֗ן וַיִּמְשַׁ֨ח אֹת֜וֹ וַיְקַדֵּ֤שׁ אֹתוֹ֙ וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֔יו וְאֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ וְאֶת־כָּל־כֵּלָ֑יו וַיִּמְשָׁחֵ֖ם וַיְקַדֵּ֥שׁ אֹתָֽם: |
| And it was that on the day that Moses finished: Heb. כַּלּוֹת. On the day the Mishkan was erected, the Israelites were like a bride (כַּלָּה) entering the nuptial canopy.-[Tanchuma Naso 20, 26, Pesikta Rabbathi 5:5, Pesikta d’Rav Kahana p. 6a, and other sources] [According to Tanchuma, the derash is based on the spelling כַּלֹּת, which differs from the spelling in all extant sifrei Torah. Some believe that the derash is based on the vowelization כַּלּוֹת, instead of כְּלוֹת, which would clearly mean “finishing.” Heidenheim believes that the choice of the word כַּלּוֹת, the root of which is ambiguous, indicates the intention of the Torah to include both meanings: finishing and nuptials. See fn. 104 to Pesikta d’Rav Kahana.] | | ויהי ביום כלות משה: כלת כתיב, יום הקמת המשכן היו ישראל ככלה הנכנסת לחופה: |
| Moses finished: Bezalel, Oholiab, and all the wise-hearted [men] assembled the Mishkan, yet Scripture credits Moses with it, because he utterly devoted himself to it, overseeing that the design of each article conformed with what he was shown on the mount [Sinai], to instruct the craftsmen, and he did not err in any design. Similarly, we find with David, that since he devoted himself to the building of the Temple, as it says, “O Lord, remember for David all his affliction, that he swore to the Lord…” (Ps. 132:1-2), therefore, it [the Temple] was called by his name, as it says, “See your House, David” (I Kings 12:16). - [See Midrash Tanchuma Naso 21] | | כלות משה: בצלאל ואהליאב וכל חכם לב עשו את המשכן, ותלאו הכתוב במשה, לפי שמסר נפשו עליו לראות תבנית כל דבר ודבר כמו שהראהו בהר להורות לעושי המלאכה, ולא טעה בתבנית אחת וכן מצינו בדוד לפי שמסר נפשו על בנין בית המקדש, שנאמר זכור ה' לדוד את כל ענותו אשר נשבע לה' וגו' (תהלים קלב, א - ב), לפיכך נקרא על שמו, שנאמר ראה ביתך דוד (מלכים א' יב, טז): |
| [On the day] that Moses finished erecting: It does not say: “On the day he erected.” This teaches us that throughout the seven days of investitures, Moses erected it and dismantled it, but on that day he erected it but did not dismantle it. Therefore, it says, “Moses finished erecting”-that day marked the end of his erecting [the Mishkan]. It was the New Moon of Nissan. On the second [day], the red cow was burned; on the third [day], they sprinkled the first sprinkling (See below ch. 19); and on the seventh [day], they [the Levites] were shaved (see below 5:7). - [Sifrei 1:145] | | ביום כלות משה להקים: ולא נאמר ביום הקים מלמד שכל שבעת ימי המלואים היה משה מעמידו ומפרקו ובאותו היום העמידו ולא פרקו, לכך נאמר ביום כלות משה להקים, אותו היום כלו הקמותיו וראש חדש ניסן היה, בשני נשרפה הפרה, בשלישי הזו הזיה ראשונה, ובשביעי גלחו: |
| 2The chieftains of Israel, the heads of their fathers' houses, presented [their offerings]. They were the leaders of the tribes. They were the ones who were present during the counting, | | בוַיַּקְרִ֨יבוּ֙ נְשִׂיאֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל רָאשֵׁ֖י בֵּ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם הֵ֚ם נְשִׂיאֵ֣י הַמַּטֹּ֔ת הֵ֥ם הָעֹֽמְדִ֖ים עַל־הַפְּקֻדִֽים: |
| They were the leaders of the tribes: They were the officers [appointed] over them in Egypt, and they were beaten on account of them, as it says,“The officers of the children of Israel were beaten” (Exod. 5:14). [Rashi interprets הַמַּטֹּת as“the sticks.” Hence, נְשִׂיאֵי הַמַּטֹּת means “the chieftains who were beaten with sticks.”] - [Sifrei 1:145] | | הם נשיאי המטת: שהיו שוטרים עליהם במצרים והיו מוכים עליהם, שנאמר (שמות ה, יד) ויכו שוטרי בני ישראל וגו': |
| who were present during the counting: They stood with Moses and Aaron when they counted the Israelites, as it says,“With you [Moses and Aaron] there shall be [a man from each tribe]” (Num. 1:4). | | הם העומדים על הפקודים: שעמדו עם משה ואהרן כשמנו את ישראל, שנאמר (במדבר א, ד) ואתכם יהיו וגו': |
| 3They brought their offering before the Lord: six covered wagons and twelve oxen, a wagon for each two chieftains, and an ox for each one; they presented them in front of the Mishkan. | | גוַיָּבִ֨יאוּ אֶת־קָרְבָּנָ֜ם לִפְנֵ֣י יְהוָֹ֗ה שֵֽׁשׁ־עֶגְלֹ֥ת צָב֙ וּשְׁנֵ֣י עָשָׂ֣ר בָּקָ֔ר עֲגָלָ֛ה עַל־שְׁנֵ֥י הַנְּשִׂאִ֖ים וְשׁ֣וֹר לְאֶחָ֑ד וַיַּקְרִ֥יבוּ אוֹתָ֖ם לִפְנֵ֥י הַמִּשְׁכָּֽן: |
| six covered wagons: The word צָב can denote only “covered.” Similarly,“In covered wagons (בַּצַּבִּים) and on mules” (Isa. 66:20). Covered wagons are called צַבִּים. [Some expound the word צָב in the sense of הַצְבִי יִשְׂרָאֵל, “O beauty of Israel” (II Sam. 1:19), (meaning) that they were elegant.] - [Sifrei Naso 1:148, Num. Rabbah 12: 17. See Maharzav.] | | שש עגלת צב: אין צב אלא מחופים וכן (ישעיה סו, כ) בצבים ובפרדים, עגלות מכוסות קרויות צבים: |
| they presented them in front of the Mishkan: for Moses did not accept them from their hands until he was instructed to do so by the Omnipresent. Rabbi Nathan says: Why did the chieftains see fit to be the first to contribute here, whereas concerning the work of the Mishkan , they were not the first to contribute [but the last]? However, the chieftains said as follows, “Let the people contribute what they can, and then we will complement whatever is missing.” When they saw that the people had supplied everything-as it says, “And the work was sufficient for them” (Exod. 36:7)-they said, “What is left for us to do now?” So they brought the shoham stones and the filling [stones] for the ephod and the choshen . Therefore, [in order to make amends,] here they were first to contribute. — [Sifrei Naso 1:150] | | ויקריבו אותם לפני המשכן: שלא קבל משה מידם עד שנאמר לו מפי המקום. אמר רבי נתן מה ראו הנשיאים להתנדב כאן בתחלה, ובמלאכת המשכן לא התנדבו תחלה, אלא כך אמרו הנשיאים יתנדבו צבור מה שיתנדבו, ומה שמחסרין אנו משלימין, כיון שראו שהשלימו צבור את הכל, שנאמר (שמות לו, ז) והמלאכה היתה דים, אמרו מעתה מה לנו לעשות, הביאו את אבני השוהם והמלואים לאפוד ולחשן, לכך התנדבו כאן תחלה: |
| 4The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: | | דוַיֹּ֥אמֶר יְהוָֹ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר: |
| 5Take [it] from them, and let them be used in the service of the Tent of Meeting. You shall give them to the Levites, in accordance with each man's work. | | הקַ֚ח מֵֽאִתָּ֔ם וְהָי֕וּ לַֽעֲבֹ֕ד אֶת־עֲבֹדַ֖ת אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד וְנָֽתַתָּ֤ה אוֹתָם֙ אֶל־הַֽלְוִיִּ֔ם אִ֖ישׁ כְּפִ֥י עֲבֹֽדָתֽוֹ: |
| 6So Moses took the wagons and the cattle and gave them to the Levites. | | ווַיִּקַּ֣ח משֶׁ֔ה אֶת־הָֽעֲגָלֹ֖ת וְאֶת־הַבָּקָ֑ר וַיִּתֵּ֥ן אוֹתָ֖ם אֶל־הַֽלְוִיִּֽם: |
| 7He gave two wagons and four oxen to the sons of Gershon, according to their work. | | זאֵ֣ת | שְׁתֵּ֣י הָֽעֲגָל֗וֹת וְאֵת֙ אַרְבַּ֣עַת הַבָּקָ֔ר נָתַ֖ן לִבְנֵ֣י גֵֽרְשׁ֑וֹן כְּפִ֖י עֲבֹֽדָתָֽם: |
| according to their work: Because the burden of the sons of Gershon was lighter than that of [the sons of] Merari, who carried the planks, the pillars, and the sockets. | | כפי עבודתם: שהיה משא בני גרשון קל משל מררי, שהיו נושאים הקרשים והעמודים והאדנים: |
| 8And he gave four wagons and eight oxen to the sons of Merari, according to their work under the direction of Ithamar the son of Aaron the priest. | | חוְאֵ֣ת | אַרְבַּ֣ע הָֽעֲגָלֹ֗ת וְאֵת֙ שְׁמֹנַ֣ת הַבָּקָ֔ר נָתַ֖ן לִבְנֵ֣י מְרָרִ֑י כְּפִי֙ עֲבֹ֣דָתָ֔ם בְּיַד֙ אִֽיתָמָ֔ר בֶּן־אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן הַכֹּהֵֽן: |
| 9But to the sons of Kohath he did not give, for incumbent upon them was the work involving the holy [objects], which they were to carry on their shoulders. | | טוְלִבְנֵ֥י קְהָ֖ת לֹ֣א נָתָ֑ן כִּֽי־עֲבֹדַ֤ת הַקֹּ֨דֶשׁ֙ עֲלֵהֶ֔ם בַּכָּתֵ֖ף יִשָּֽׂאוּ: |
| for incumbent upon them was the work involving the holy [objects]: [I.e.,] the burden of the holy objects [such as] the ark and the table, etc. [was incumbent upon them]. Therefore “they were to carry on their shoulders” [and not in wagons]. | | כי עבדת הקדש עליהם: משא דבר הקדושה הארון והשלחן וגו', לפיכך בכתף ישאו: |
| 10The chieftains brought [offerings for] the dedication of the altar on the day it was anointed; the chieftains presented their offerings in front of the altar. | | יוַיַּקְרִ֣יבוּ הַנְּשִׂאִ֗ים אֵ֚ת חֲנֻכַּ֣ת הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ בְּי֖וֹם הִמָּשַׁ֣ח אֹת֑וֹ וַיַּקְרִ֧יבוּ הַנְּשִׂיאִ֛ם אֶת־קָרְבָּנָ֖ם לִפְנֵ֥י הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ: |
| The chieftains brought [offerings for] the dedication of the altar: After they had contributed the wagons and the oxen for carrying the Mishkan , they were inspired to contribute offerings for the altar to dedicate it. | | ויקריבו הנשאים את חנכת המזבח: לאחר שהתנדבו העגלות והבקר לשאת המשכן, נשאם לבם להתנדב קרבנות המזבח לחנכו: |
| the chieftains presented their offerings in front of the altar: For Moses did not accept it from their hands until instructed to do so by the Almighty. — [Sifrei Naso 1:152] | | ויקריבו הנשיאים את קרבנם לפני המזבח: כי לא קבל משה מידם עד שנאמר לו מפי הגבורה: |
| 11The Lord said to Moses: One chieftain each day, one chieftain each day, shall present his offering for the dedication of the altar. | | יאוַיֹּ֥אמֶר יְהוָֹ֖ה אֶל־משֶׁ֑ה נָשִׂ֨יא אֶחָ֜ד לַיּ֗וֹם נָשִׂ֤יא אֶחָד֙ לַיּ֔וֹם יַקְרִ֨יבוּ֙ אֶת־קָרְבָּנָ֔ם לַֽחֲנֻכַּ֖ת הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ: |
| shall present his offering for the dedication of the altar: But Moses still did not know how they should bring [the offerings], whether in the order of their births [namely, the order in which Jacob’s sons were born] or according to the order in which they traveled-until he was instructed by the Holy One, blessed is He, that they should bring the offerings according to the order in which they traveled, each one in his day. — [Sifrei Naso 1:152] | | יקריבו את קרבנם לחנכת המזבח: ועדיין לא היה יודע משה האיך יקריבו, אם כסדר תולדותם, אם כסדר המסעות, עד שנאמר לו מפי הקב"ה יקריבו למסעות, איש יומו: |
| 12The one who brought his offering on the first day was Nahshon the son of Amminadab of the tribe of Judah. | | יבוַיְהִ֗י הַמַּקְרִ֛יב בַּיּ֥וֹם הָֽרִאשׁ֖וֹן אֶת־קָרְבָּנ֑וֹ נַחְשׁ֥וֹן בֶּן־עַמִּֽינָדָ֖ב לְמַטֵּ֥ה יְהוּדָֽה: |
| on the first day: That day acquired ten crowns; it was the first day of Creation, the first day of the [offerings of the] chieftains, etc., as it is stated in Seder Olam. | | ביום הראשון: אותו היום נטל עשר עטרות, ראשון למעשה בראשית, ראשון לנשיאים וכו', כדאיתא בסדר עולם: |
| of the tribe of Judah: Scripture traces his kinship to his tribe, but not that he solicited [the offering] from his tribe and then offered it up. Or perhaps it says, “of the tribe of Judah” to teach that he indeed solicited [the offering] from his tribe and then brought [it]? Scripture therefore states,“This was the offering of Nahshon the son of Amminadab” (verse 17), [to teach us that] he brought from his own [resources]. — [Sifrei Naso 1:153, 157] | | למטה יהודה: יחסו הכתוב על שבטו, ולא שגבה משבטו והקריב. או אינו אומר למטה יהודה אלא שגבה משבטו והביא, תלמוד לומר זה קרבן נחשון, משלו הביא: |
| 13And his offering was one silver bowl weighing one hundred and thirty [shekels], one silver sprinkling basin [weighing] seventy shekels according to the holy shekel, both filled with fine flour mixed with olive oil for a meal offering. | | יגוְקָרְבָּנ֞וֹ קַֽעֲרַת־כֶּ֣סֶף אַחַ֗ת שְׁלשִׁ֣ים וּמֵאָה֘ מִשְׁקָלָהּ֒ מִזְרָ֤ק אֶחָד֙ כֶּ֔סֶף שִׁבְעִ֥ים שֶׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ שְׁנֵיהֶ֣ם | מְלֵאִ֗ים סֹ֛לֶת בְּלוּלָ֥ה בַשֶּׁ֖מֶן לְמִנְחָֽה: |
| both filled with fine flour: for a voluntary meal offering. — [Sifrei Naso 1:155] | | שניהם מלאים סלת: למנחת נדבה: |
| 14One spoon [weighing] ten [shekels] of gold filled with incense. | | ידכַּ֥ף אַחַ֛ת עֲשָׂרָ֥ה זָהָ֖ב מְלֵאָ֥ה קְטֹֽרֶת: |
| ten gold [shekels]: Heb. עִשָׂרָה זָהָב. As Targum [Onkelos] renders: it contained the weight of ten [shekels of] silver according to the holy shekel. | | עשרה זהב: כתרגומו, משקל עשר שקלי הקדש היה בה: |
| filled with incense: We never find incense brought by an individual or on the outer [i.e., copper] altar except in this case; this was a temporary order. — [Men. 50a] | | מלאה קטרת: לא מצינו קטרת ליחיד ולא על מזבח החיצון אלא זו בלבד, והוראת שעה היתה: |
| 15One young bull, one ram and one lamb in its first year for a burnt offering. | | טופַּ֣ר אֶחָ֞ד בֶּן־בָּקָ֗ר אַ֧יִל אֶחָ֛ד כֶּֽבֶשׂ־אֶחָ֥ד בֶּן־שְׁנָת֖וֹ לְעֹלָֽה: |
| One young bull: The choice of the herd. — [Sifrei Naso 1:146] | | פר אחד: מיוחד שבעדרו: |
| 16One young he goat for a sin offering. | | טזשְׂעִיר־עִזִּ֥ים אֶחָ֖ד לְחַטָּֽאת: |
| One young he-goat for a sin-offering: to atone for [uncleanness caused by] a grave in the depths [i.e., an unknown grave which may lie in the earth over which people unknowingly pass, rendering them unclean],which is a [case of] uncertain contamination. - [Sifrei Naso 1:156] | | שעיר עזים אחד לחטאת: לכפר על קבר התהום וטומאת ספק: |
| 17And for the peace offering: two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs in their first year; this was the offering of Nahshon the son of Amminadab. | | יזוּלְזֶ֣בַח הַשְּׁלָמִים֘ בָּקָ֣ר שְׁנַ֒יִם֒ אֵילִ֤ם חֲמִשָּׁה֙ עַתּוּדִ֣ים חֲמִשָּׁ֔ה כְּבָשִׂ֥ים בְּנֵֽי־שָׁנָ֖ה חֲמִשָּׁ֑ה זֶ֛ה קָרְבַּ֥ן נַחְשׁ֖וֹן בֶּן־עַמִּֽינָדָֽב: |
| 18On the second day, Nethanel the son of Zu'ar, the chieftain of Issachar brought [his offering]. | | יחבַּיּוֹם֙ הַשֵּׁנִ֔י הִקְרִ֖יב נְתַנְאֵ֣ל בֶּן־צוּעָ֑ר נְשִׂ֖יא יִשָּׂשכָֽר: |
| Nethanel the son of Zu’ar… brought…: | | הקריב נתנאל בן צוער: |
| 19He brought his offering of one silver bowl weighing one hundred and thirty [shekels], one silver sprinkling basin [weighing] seventy shekels according to the holy shekel, both filled with fine flour mixed with olive oil for a meal offering. | | יטהִקְרִ֨ב אֶת־קָרְבָּנ֜וֹ קַֽעֲרַת־כֶּ֣סֶף אַחַ֗ת שְׁלשִׁ֣ים וּמֵאָה֘ מִשְׁקָלָהּ֒ מִזְרָ֤ק אֶחָד֙ כֶּ֔סֶף שִׁבְעִ֥ים שֶׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ שְׁנֵיהֶ֣ם | מְלֵאִ֗ים סֹ֛לֶת בְּלוּלָ֥ה בַשֶּׁ֖מֶן לְמִנְחָֽה: |
| He brought his offering: Why is the word הִקְרִב, “brought [his offering],” used in connection with the tribe of Issachar, but is not used in connection with any of the [other] tribes? Because [the tribe of] Reuben came and complained, “Is it not enough that my brother Judah has preceded me? Let me [at least] offer up after him.” Moses said to him,“I was told by the Almighty that they should offer up in the order in which they travel, according to their divisions.” This is why it says: הִקְרִב אֶת קָרְבָּנוֹ, [in which the word הִקְרִב is] missing a“yud,” [thus] giving it the meaning of הַקְרִב, in the imperative-for he was commanded by the Almighty,“Bring the offering!” (Sifrei Naso 1:158) What is the meaning of הִקְרִב … הִקְרִב, twice? For because of two reasons he [Issachar] merited to be the second of the tribes to offer their sacrifices: One, because they were [well] versed in the Torah, as it says,“And of the sons of Issachar, those who had understanding of the times” (I Chron. 12:32). Another, because they advised the chieftains to contribute these offerings (Sifrei). In the writings of Rabbi Moses Hadarshan [“the preacher”], I found [the following]: Rabbi Phinehas the son of Yair says [that] Nethaniel the son of Zu’ar gave them this idea. | | הקרב את קרבנו: מה תלמוד לומר הקריב בשבטו של יששכר, מה שלא נאמר בכל השבטים, לפי שבא ראובן וערער ואמר די שקדמני יהודה אחי, אקריב אני אחריו. אמר לו משה מפי הגבורה נאמר לי שיקריבו כסדר מסען לדגליהם. לכך אמר הקרב את קרבנו, והוא חסר יו"ד, שהוא משמע הקרב, לשון צווי, שמפי הגבורה נצטווה הקרב. ומהו הקריב הקרב שני פעמים, שבשביל שני דברים זכה להקריב שני לשבטים אחת שהיו יודעים בתורה, שנאמר (ד"ה א' יב, לג) ומבני יששכר יודעי בינה לעתים, ואחת שהם נתנו עצה לנשיאים להתנדב קרבנות הללו. וביסודו של ר' משה הדרשן מצאתי אמר רבי פנחס בן יאיר, נתנאל בן צוער השיאן עצה זו: |
| one silver bowl: Heb. קַעֲרַת כֶּסֶף. The numerical value of [the two words] in gematria amounts to nine hundred and thirty, corresponding to the years of Adam, the first man (Gen. 5:5). ק = 100 ע = 70 ר = 200 ת =400 כ = 20 ס = 60 פ = 80, total 930 | | קערת כסף: מנין אותיותיו בגימטריה תתק"ל כנגד שנותיו של אדם הראשון: |
| weighing one hundred and thirty shekels: Alluding to the fact that when he [Adam] began to raise a family to maintain the existence of the world, he was one hundred and thirty years old, as it says,“Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and he begot…” (Gen. 5:3). | | שלשים ומאה משקלה: על שם שכשהעמיד תולדות לקיום העולם בן מאה ושלשים שנה היה, שנאמר (בראשית ה, ג) ויחי אדם שלשים ומאת שנה ויולד בדמותו וגו': |
| one silver sprinkling basin: Heb. מִזְרָק אֶחָד כֶּסֶף. The gematria of these[three words] is five hundred and twenty- מ = 40 ז = 7 ר = 200 ק = 100 א = 1 ח = 8 ד = 4 כ = 20 ס = 60 פ = 80, total 520, alluding to Noah, who began raising a family at the age of five hundred, and alluding to the twenty years before his children were born in which the decree of the [Great] Flood was enacted, as I explained [to be the meaning of the verse],“His days shall be one hundred and twenty years” (Gen. 6:3). This is why it says מִזְרָק אֶחָד כֶּסֶף rather than מִזְרָק כֶּסֶף אֶחָד, as it says in the case of the [silver] bowl [i.e., קַעֲרַת כֶּסֶף אַחַת], to tell us that even the letters of [the word] אֶחָד are included in the calculation. | | מזרק אחד כסף: בגימטריה תק"כ, על שם נח שהעמיד תולדות בן ת"ק שנה, ועל שם עשרים שנה שנגזרה גזירת המבול קודם תולדותיו, כמו שפירשתי אצל (בראשית ו, ג) והיו ימיו מאה ועשרים שנה, לפיכך נאמר מזרק אחד כסף ולא נאמר מזרק כסף אחד, כמו שנאמר בקערה, לומר שאף אותיות של אחד מצטרפות למנין: |
| seventy shekels: Corresponding to the seventy nations who emanated from his [Noah’s] sons. | | שבעים שקל: כנגד שבעים אומות שיצאו מבניו: |
| 20One spoon [weighing] ten [shekels] of gold filled with incense. | | ככַּ֥ף אַחַ֛ת עֲשָׂרָ֥ה זָהָ֖ב מְלֵאָ֥ה קְטֹֽרֶת: |
| One spoon: Corresponding to the Torah, which was given by the hand of the Holy One, blessed is He. [כַּף also means“hand.”] | | כף אחת: כנגד התורה שנתנה מידו של הקב"ה: |
| ten gold [shekels]: Corresponding to the Ten Commandments. | | עשרה זהב: כנגד עשרת הדברות: |
| filled with incense: קְטֹרֶת. The gematria of קְטֹרֶת [i.e., 613] corresponds to the six hundred and thirteen commandments-provided that you convert the “kuph” into a “daleth” in accordance with the cipher known as א״ת ב״ש ג״ר ד״ק [in which the first and last letters of the alphabet are interchangeable, the second and the second-to-last letters, etc. Thus, ד = 4 ט = 9 ר = 200 ת = 400, totaling 613]. | | מלאה קטרת: גימטריה של קטרת תרי"ג מצות, ובלבד שתחליף קו"ף בדל"ת על ידי א"ת ב"ש ג"ר ד"ק: |
| 21One young bull, one ram and one lamb in its first year for a burnt offering. | | כאפַּ֣ר אֶחָ֞ד בֶּן־בָּקָ֗ר אַ֧יִל אֶחָ֛ד כֶּֽבֶשׂ־אֶחָ֥ד בֶּן־שְׁנָת֖וֹ לְעֹלָֽה: |
| One young bull: Corresponding to Abraham, of whom it says, “He took a young bull” (Gen. 18:7). | | פר אחד: כנגד אברהם, שנאמר בו (בראשית יח, ז) ויקח בן בקר: |
| one ram: Corresponding to Isaac [of whom it says,] “and took the ram [and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son]…” (Gen. 22:13). | | איל אחד: כנגד יצחק (שם כב, יג) ויקח את האיל וגו': |
| one lamb: Corresponding to Jacob, [about whom it says,] “Jacob separated the lambs” (Gen. 30:40). | | כבש אחד: כנגד יעקב (שם ל, מ) והכשבים הפריד יעקב: |
| 22One young he goat for a sin offering. | | כבשְׂעִיר־עִזִּ֥ים אֶחָ֖ד לְחַטָּֽאת: |
| One young he-goat: to atone for the sale of Joseph, about which it says, “and they slaughtered a kid” (Gen. 37:31). | | שעיר עזים: לכפר על מכירת יוסף, שנאמר בו (שם לז, לא) וישחטו שעיר עזים: |
| 23And for the peace offering: two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs in their first year; this was the offering of Nethanel the son of Zu'ar. | | כגוּלְזֶ֣בַח הַשְּׁלָמִים֘ בָּקָ֣ר שְׁנַ֒יִם֒ אֵילִ֤ם חֲמִשָּׁה֙ עַתֻּדִ֣ים חֲמִשָּׁ֔ה כְּבָשִׂ֥ים בְּנֵֽי־שָׁנָ֖ה חֲמִשָּׁ֑ה זֶ֛ה קָרְבַּ֥ן נְתַנְאֵ֖ל בֶּן־צוּעָֽר: |
| And for the peace-offering: two oxen: Corresponding to Moses and Aaron, who established peace between Israel and their Father in heaven. | | ולזבח השלמים בקר שנים: כנגד משה ואהרן, שנתנו שלום בין ישראל לאביהם שבשמים: |
| Rams…he-goats…lambs: Three types, corresponding to kohanim, Levites, and Israelites, and corresponding to the Torah, the Prophets, and the Holy Writings. The three fives [in this verse] correspond to the five books of the Pentateuch, to the five commandments inscribed on the first tablet, and the five commandments inscribed on the second one. Until this point, [my comments were] in the name of Rabbi Moses Hadarshan [the preacher]. | | אילם עתדים כבשים: שלשה מינים כנגד כהנים ולוים וישראלים, וכנגד תורה נביאים וכתובים. שלש חמשיות כנגד חמשה חומשין, וחמשת הדברות הכתובין על לוח אחד, וחמשה הכתובין על השני. עד כאן מיסודו של ר' משה הדרשן: |
| 24On the third day, the chieftain was of the sons of Zebulun, Eliab the son of Helon. | | כדבַּיּוֹם֙ הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֔י נָשִׂ֖יא לִבְנֵ֣י זְבוּלֻ֑ן אֱלִיאָ֖ב בֶּן־חֵלֹֽן: |
| On the third day, the chieftain…: On the third day, the chieftain who brought the offering was from the sons of Zebulun, and so with all of them. However, regarding Nethanel, about whom it states, הִקְרִיב נְתַנְאֵל, “Nethanel… brought,” it is appropriate to follow it with the phrase “the chieftain of Issachar” [unlike the other instances, where the verse refers to the chieftain as“the chieftain of the sons of so-and-so,” followed by his name], since his name and what he had offered has already been mentioned. Concerning the others, where it does not say: הִקְרִיב, “he offered,” the appropriate wording is this,“the chieftain was of the sons of so-and-so”-that day, the chieftain who brought his offering was from such-and-such a tribe. [Why the word הִקְרִיב is written only in reference to Nethanel is discussed above on verses 18 and 19.] | | ביום השלישי נשיא וגו': ביום השלישי היה נשיא המקריב לבני זבולון, וכן כולם, אבל בנתנאל שנאמר בו הקריב נתנאל, נופל אחריו הלשון לומר נשיא יששכר, לפי שכבר הזכיר שמו והקרבתו, ובשאר שלא נאמר בהן הקריב, נופל עליהן לשון זה נשיא לבני פלוני, אותו היום היה הנשיא המקריב לשבט פלוני: |
| 25His offering was one silver bowl weighing one hundred and thirty [shekels], one silver sprinkling basin [weighing] seventy shekels according to the holy shekel, both filled with fine flour mixed with olive oil for a meal offering. | | כהקָרְבָּנ֞וֹ קַֽעֲרַת־כֶּ֣סֶף אַחַ֗ת שְׁלשִׁ֣ים וּמֵאָה֘ מִשְׁקָלָהּ֒ מִזְרָ֤ק אֶחָד֙ כֶּ֔סֶף שִׁבְעִ֥ים שֶׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ שְׁנֵיהֶ֣ם | מְלֵאִ֗ים סֹ֛לֶת בְּלוּלָ֥ה בַשֶּׁ֖מֶן לְמִנְחָֽה: |
| 26One spoon [weighing] ten [shekels] of gold filled with incense. | | כוכַּ֥ף אַחַ֛ת עֲשָׂרָ֥ה זָהָ֖ב מְלֵאָ֥ה קְטֹֽרֶת: |
| 27One young bull, one ram and one lamb in its first year for a burnt offering. | | כזפַּ֣ר אֶחָ֞ד בֶּן־בָּקָ֗ר אַ֧יִל אֶחָ֛ד כֶּֽבֶשׂ־אֶחָ֥ד בֶּן־שְׁנָת֖וֹ לְעֹלָֽה: |
| 28One young he goat for a sin offering. | | כחשְׂעִיר־עִזִּ֥ים אֶחָ֖ד לְחַטָּֽאת: |
| 29And for the peace offering: two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs in their first year; this was the offering of Eliab the son of Helon. | | כטוּלְזֶ֣בַח הַשְּׁלָמִים֘ בָּקָ֣ר שְׁנַ֒יִם֒ אֵילִ֤ם חֲמִשָּׁה֙ עַתֻּדִ֣ים חֲמִשָּׁ֔ה כְּבָשִׂ֥ים בְּנֵֽי־שָׁנָ֖ה חֲמִשָּׁ֑ה זֶ֛ה קָרְבַּ֥ן אֱלִיאָ֖ב בֶּן־חֵלֹֽן: |
| 30On the fourth day, the chieftain was of the sons of Reuben, Elitzur the son of Shedeur. | | לבַּיּוֹם֙ הָֽרְבִיעִ֔י נָשִׂ֖יא לִבְנֵ֣י רְאוּבֵ֑ן אֱלִיצ֖וּר בֶּן־שְׁדֵיאֽוּר: |
| 31His offering was one silver bowl weighing one hundred and thirty [shekels], one silver sprinkling basin [weighing] seventy shekels according to the holy shekel, both filled with fine flour mixed with olive oil for a meal offering. | | לאקָרְבָּנ֞וֹ קַֽעֲרַת־כֶּ֣סֶף אַחַ֗ת שְׁלשִׁ֣ים וּמֵאָה֘ מִשְׁקָלָהּ֒ מִזְרָ֤ק אֶחָד֙ כֶּ֔סֶף שִׁבְעִ֥ים שֶׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ שְׁנֵיהֶ֣ם | מְלֵאִ֗ים סֹ֛לֶת בְּלוּלָ֥ה בַשֶּׁ֖מֶן לְמִנְחָֽה: |
| 32One spoon [weighing] ten [shekels] of gold filled with incense. | | לבכַּ֥ף אַחַ֛ת עֲשָׂרָ֥ה זָהָ֖ב מְלֵאָ֥ה קְטֹֽרֶת: |
| 33One young bull, one ram and one lamb in its first year for a burnt offering. | | לגפַּ֣ר אֶחָ֞ד בֶּן־בָּקָ֗ר אַ֧יִל אֶחָ֛ד כֶּֽבֶשׂ־אֶחָ֥ד בֶּן־שְׁנָת֖וֹ לְעֹלָֽה: |
| 34One young he goat for a sin offering. | | לדשְׂעִיר־עִזִּ֥ים אֶחָ֖ד לְחַטָּֽאת: |
| 35And for the peace offering: two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs in their first year; this was the offering of Elitzur the son of Shedeur. | | להוּלְזֶ֣בַח הַשְּׁלָמִים֘ בָּקָ֣ר שְׁנַ֒יִם֒ אֵילִ֤ם חֲמִשָּׁה֙ עַתֻּדִ֣ים חֲמִשָּׁ֔ה כְּבָשִׂ֥ים בְּנֵֽי־שָׁנָ֖ה חֲמִשָּׁ֑ה זֶ֛ה קָרְבַּ֥ן אֱלִיצ֖וּר בֶּן־שְׁדֵיאֽוּר: |
| 36On the fifth day, the chieftain was of the sons of Simeon, Shelumiel the son of Zurishaddai. | | לובַּיּוֹם֙ הַֽחֲמִישִׁ֔י נָשִׂ֖יא לִבְנֵ֣י שִׁמְע֑וֹן שְׁלֻֽמִיאֵ֖ל בֶּן־צוּרִֽישַׁדָּֽי: |
| 37His offering was one silver bowl weighing one hundred and thirty [shekels], one silver sprinkling basin [weighing] seventy shekels according to the holy shekel, both filled with fine flour mixed with olive oil for a meal offering. | | לזקָרְבָּנ֞וֹ קַֽעֲרַת־כֶּ֣סֶף אַחַ֗ת שְׁלשִׁ֣ים וּמֵאָה֘ מִשְׁקָלָהּ֒ מִזְרָ֤ק אֶחָד֙ כֶּ֔סֶף שִׁבְעִ֥ים שֶׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ שְׁנֵיהֶ֣ם | מְלֵאִ֗ים סֹ֛לֶת בְּלוּלָ֥ה בַשֶּׁ֖מֶן לְמִנְחָֽה: |
| 38One spoon [weighing] ten [shekels] of gold filled with incense. | | לחכַּ֥ף אַחַ֛ת עֲשָׂרָ֥ה זָהָ֖ב מְלֵאָ֥ה קְטֹֽרֶת: |
| 39One young bull, one ram and one lamb in its first year for a burnt offering. | | לטפַּ֣ר אֶחָ֞ד בֶּן־בָּקָ֗ר אַ֧יִל אֶחָ֛ד כֶּֽבֶשׂ־אֶחָ֥ד בֶּן־שְׁנָת֖וֹ לְעֹלָֽה: |
| 40One young he goat for a sin offering. | | משְׂעִיר־עִזִּ֥ים אֶחָ֖ד לְחַטָּֽאת: |
| 41And for the peace offering: two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs in their first year; this was the offering of Shelumiel the son of Zurishaddai. | | מאוּלְזֶ֣בַח הַשְּׁלָמִים֘ בָּקָ֣ר שְׁנַ֒יִם֒ אֵילִ֤ם חֲמִשָּׁה֙ עַתֻּדִ֣ים חֲמִשָּׁ֔ה כְּבָשִׂ֥ים בְּנֵֽי־שָׁנָ֖ה חֲמִשָּׁ֑ה זֶ֛ה קָרְבַּ֥ן שְׁלֻֽמִיאֵ֖ל בֶּן־צוּרִֽישַׁדָּֽי: |
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 39
David's prayer bewailing his suffering. But it is not suffering itself that pains him, rather he is saddened by its disturbing his Torah study. For man's days are few, "and if not now, when (will he study)?" for he may die, today or tomorrow. He therefore requests that his suffering be removed, to enable him to study Torah and acquire a place in the World to Come.
1. For the Conductor, for yedutun, a psalm by David.
2. I said that I would guard my ways from sinning with my tongue; I would guard my mouth with a muzzle, [even] while the wicked one is before me.
3. I became mute with stillness, I was silent [even] from the good, though my pain was crippling.
4. My heart grew hot within me, a fire blazed in my utterance, as I spoke with my tongue.
5. O Lord, let me know my end and what is the measure of my days, that I may know when I will cease.
6. Behold, like handbreadths You set my days; my lifetime is as naught before You. But all is futility, all mankind's existence, Selah.
7. Only in darkness does man walk, seeking only futility; he amasses riches and knows not who will reap them.
8. And now, what is my hope, my Lord? My longing is to You.
9. Rescue me from all my transgressions; do not make me the scorn of the degenerate.
10. I am mute, I do not open my mouth, for You have caused [my suffering].
11. Remove Your affliction from me; I am devastated by the attack of Your hand.
12. In reproach for sin You chastened man; like a moth, You wore away that which is precious to him. All mankind is nothing but futility, forever.
13. Hear my prayer, O Lord, listen to my cry; do not be silent to my tears, for I am a stranger with You, a sojourner like all my forefathers.
14. Turn from me, that I may recover my strength, before I depart and I am no more.
Chapter 40
The psalmist speaks of the numerous wonders that God wrought for the Jewish people, asking: "Who can articulate His might? I would relate and speak of them, but they are too numerous to recount!" He created the world and split the sea for the sake of Israel, [yet] He desires no sacrifices, only that we listen to His voice.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. I put my hope in the Lord; He turned to me and heard my cry.
3. He raised me from the turbulent pit, from the slimy mud, and set my feet upon a rock, steadying my steps.
4. He put a new song in my mouth, a hymn to our God; multitudes will see and fear, and will trust in the Lord.
5. Fortunate is the man who has made the Lord his trust, and did not turn to the haughty, nor to those who stray after falsehood.
6. You have done much, O You, Lord my God-Your wonders and thoughts are for us; none can compare to You; should I relate or speak of them, they are too numerous to recount!
7. You desired neither sacrifice nor meal-offering, but [obedient] ears You opened for me; You requested neither burnt-offering nor sin-offering.
8. Then I said, "Behold, I come with a Scroll of the Book written for me."
9. I desire to fulfill Your will, my God; and Your Torah is in my innards.
10. I proclaimed [Your] righteousness in a vast congregation; behold I will not restrain my lips-O Lord, You know!
11. I did not conceal Your righteousness within my heart; I declared Your faithfulness and deliverance; I did not hide Your kindness and truth from the vast congregation.
12. May You, Lord, not withhold Your mercies from me; may Your kindness and truth constantly guard me.
13. For countless evils surround me; my sins have overtaken me and I cannot see; they outnumber the hairs of my head, and my heart has abandoned me.
14. May it please You, Lord, to save me; O Lord, hurry to my aid.
15. Let those who seek my life, to end it, be shamed and humiliated together; let those who desire my harm retreat and be disgraced.
16. Let those who say about me, "Aha! Aha!" be desolate, in return for their shaming [me].
17. Let all those who seek You exult and rejoice in You; let those who love Your deliverance always say, "Be exalted, O Lord!”
18. As for me, I am poor and needy; my Lord will think of me. You are my help and my rescuer; my God, do not delay!
Chapter 41
This psalm teaches many good character traits, and inspires one to be thoughtful and conscientious in giving charity-knowing to whom to give first. Fortunate is he who is thoughtful of the sick one, providing him with his needs.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. Fortunate is he who is thoughtful of the poor, [for] the Lord will save him on the day of evil.
3. The Lord will guard him and keep him alive; he will be praised throughout the land; You will not deliver him to the desires of his enemies.
4. The Lord will support him on the bed of illness; You will turn him over in his bed all throughout his sickness.
5. I said, "Lord, be gracious to me! Heal my soul, for I have sinned against You!”
6. My foes say that evil [awaits] me: "When will he die, and his name perish?”
7. And if one comes to see [me], he speaks insincerely, for his heart gathers iniquity for himself, and when he goes out he speaks of it.
8. Together they whisper against me-all my enemies; against me they devise my harm, [saying]:
9. "Let his wickedness pour into him; now that he lies down, he shall rise no more.”
10. Even my ally in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread, has raised his heel over me.
11. But you, Lord, be gracious to me and raise me up, and I will repay them.
12. With this I shall know that You desire me, when my enemies will not shout gleefully over me.
13. And I, because of my integrity, You upheld me; You set me before You forever.
14. Blessed is the Lord, the God of Israel, to all eternity, Amen and Amen.
Chapter 42
This psalm awakens the hearts of the Children of Israel who do not feel the immense ruin, loss, and bad fortune in their being exiled from their Father's table. Were they wise, they would appreciate their past good fortune in coming thrice yearly, with joy and great awe, to behold God during the festivals, free of adversary and harm. May God place mercy before us from now to eternity, Amen Selah.
1. For the Conductor, a maskil by the sons of Korach.
2. As the deer cries longingly for brooks of water, so my soul cries longingly for You, O God!
3. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God. When will I come and behold the countenance of God?
4. My tears have been my bread day and night, when they say to me all day, "Where is your God?”
5. These do I recall, and pour out my soul from within me: how I traveled [to Jerusalem] in covered wagons; I would walk leisurely with them up to the House of God, amid the sound of rejoicing and thanksgiving, the celebrating multitude.
6. Why are you downcast, my soul, and why do you wail within me? Hope to God, for I will yet thank Him for the deliverances of His countenance.
7. My God! My soul is downcast upon me, because I remember You from the land of Jordan and Hermon's peaks, from Mount Mitzar.
8. Deep calls to deep at the roar of Your channels; all Your breakers and waves have swept over me.
9. By day the Lord ordains His kindness, and at night His song is with me, a prayer to the God of my life.
10. I say to God, my rock, "Why have You forgotten me? Why must I walk in gloom under the oppression of the enemy?”
11. Like a sword in my bones, my adversaries disgrace me, when they say to me all day, "Where is your God?”
12. Why are you downcast, my soul, and why do you wail within me? Hope to God, for I will yet thank Him; He is my deliverance, [the light of] my countenance, and my God.
Chapter 43
A significant prayer concerning the magnitude of the troubles we have suffered at the hands of the impious nations. May it be God's will to send Moshiach and Elijah the Prophet, who will lead us to the Holy Temple to offer sacrifices as in days of old.
1. Avenge me, O God, and champion my cause against an impious nation; rescue me from the man of deceit and iniquity.
2. For You are the God of my strength; why have You abandoned me? Why must I walk in gloom under the oppression of the enemy?
3. Send Your light and Your truth, they will guide me; they will bring me to Your holy mountain and to your sanctuaries.
4. Then I will come to the altar of God-to God, the joy of my delight-and praise You on the lyre, O God, my God.
5. Why are you downcast, my soul, and why do you wail within me? Hope to God, for I will yet thank Him; He is my deliverance, [the light of] my countenance, and my God.
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Thursday, Sivan 7, 5777 · June 1, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, Shaar Hayichud
Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah1
The theme of this treatise, as the Rebbe notes, is stated in its subtitle:
להבין מעט מזעיר מה שכתוב בזהר, דשמע ישראל כו׳ הוא יחודא עילאה, וברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד הוא יחודא תתאה
Let us understand [at least] in a small measure, the statement of the Zohar,2 that3 Shema Yisrael... is yichuda ila‘ah (“higher-level Unity”) and4 Baruch shem kvod malchuto leolam vaed is yichuda tata’ah (“lower-level Unity”). For vaed equals echad through the substitution (and thereby the descent) of letters,5 as stated in the Zohar.
Thus, the object of Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah will be to understand how it is possible to speak of two different levels of Divine Unity.
וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי ה׳ הוא האלקים בשמים ממעל ועל הארץ מתחת, אין עוד
It is written:6 “Know this day and take it unto your heart that G‑d is the [mighty and just] L‑rd in the heavens above and upon the earth below; there is none other.”7
The verse, if understood simplistically, seems to declare that there are no other gods dwelling in heaven or earth.
וצריך להבין. וכי תעלה על דעתך שיש אלקים נשרה במים מתחת לארץ
This requires explanation. For would it occur to you that there is a god dwelling in the waters beneath the earth,
שצריך להזהיר כל כך: והשבות אל לבבך
so that it is necessary to caution so strongly [and negate this thought by stating that one should] “take it unto your heart,” and come to the realization that this is indeed not so?
הנה כתיב: לעולם ה׳ דברך נצב בשמים
It is written:8 “Forever, O G‑d, Your word stands firm in the heavens.”
ופירש הבעל שם טוב ז״ל
The Baal Shem Tov, of blessed memory, has explained this concept at length, and made it widely known9 that this means:
כי דברך שאמרת: יהי רקיע בתוך המים וגו׳
that “Your word” which you uttered, viz.,10 “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters...,”
תיבות ואותיות אלו הן נצבות ועומדות לעולם בתוך רקיע השמים
these very words and letters through which the heavens were created stand firmly forever within the firmament of heaven
ומלובשות בתוך כל הרקיעים לעולם להחיותם
and are forever clothed within all the heavens to give them life,
Note of the Rebbe: “The fact that these words were uttered thousands of years ago presents no problem, — ”
כדכתיב: ודבר אלקינו יקום לעולם
as it is written,11 “And the word of our L‑rd shall stand firm forever,”
ודבריו חיים וקיימים לעד כו׳
and as it is likewise written,12 “And His words live and stand firm forever....”
This refers not only to those creations such as the heavenly firmament which enjoy a permanent existence, but also to those creatures which perish as individuals, with only their species continuing to exist. In all instances, the Divine life-force which created a particular creature must constantly be vested within it, incessantly creating and vivifying it anew, just as it ceaselessly recreates the heavenly firmament, as shall soon be explained.
כי אילו היו האותיות מסתלקות לרגע, חס ושלום, וחוזרות למקורן
For if the creative letters were to depart even for an instant, G‑d forbid, and return to their source, that source being the degree of G‑dliness from whence they emanate,
היו כל השמים אין ואפס ממש, והיו כלא היו כלל
all the heavens would become naught and absolute nothingness, and it would be as though they had never existed at all,
וכמו קודם מאמר: יהי רקיע כו׳ ממש
exactly as before the utterance, “Let there be a firmament.”
Before that Divine utterance the firmament did not exist at all. Were the letters that constitute the Divine utterance to depart from the firmament, it would revert to the state of never having existed at all.
The Alter Rebbe now concludes that this is true not only of the firmament, but of all created beings.
וכן בכל הברואים שבכל העולמות עליונים ותחתונים
And so it is with all created things, in all the upper and lower worlds,
ואפילו ארץ הלזו הגשמית, ובחינת דומם ממש
and even this physical earth and the realm of the completely inanimate.
Even immobile beings that show no signs of animation or spirituality, not even the degree of animation observed in the process of growth in the vegetative world, — even this extremely low life-form constantly harbors within it the Divine life-force that brought it into being.
אילו היו מסתלקות ממנה לרגע, חס ושלום, האותיות מעשרה מאמרות שבהן נבראת הארץ בששת ימי בראשית
If the letters of the Ten Utterances by which the earth was created during the Six Days of Creation were to depart from it but for an instant, G‑d forbid,
היתה חוזרת לאין ואפס ממש, כמו לפני ששת ימי בראשית ממש
it would revert to naught and absolute nothingness, exactly as before the Six Days of Creation.
וזה שאמר האריז״ל, שגם בדומם ממש כמו אבנים ועפר ומים יש בחינת נפש וחיות רוחנית
This thought was expressed by the AriZal,13 when he said that even within that which appears to be utterly inanimate matter, such as stones or earth or water, there is a soul and spiritual life-force.
דהיינו: בחינת התלבשות אותיות הדבור מעשרה מאמרות המחיות ומהוות את הדומם
That is, i.e, although they evince no demonstrable form of animation, [within them] are nevertheless enclothed the letters of speech from the Ten Utterances which give life and existence to inanimate matter,
להיות יש מאין ואפס שלפני ששת ימי בראשית
enabling it to come into being out of the naught and nothingness that preceded the Six Days of Creation.
The Ten Utterances usher inanimate matter into a state of existence, in contrast to its former state of non-being, prior to the Six Days of Creation. Thus, the letters of the Ten Utterances which cause inanimate matter to be created are its soul and life-force.
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
Sivan 7, 5777 · June 1, 2017
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
We are commanded regarding the ritual impurity [contained in and emitted by] semen. [I.e., when contracted, one must follow all the laws associated with this impurity.]
Ritual Impurity of Semen Impurity caused by Discharge
Ritual Impurity of Semen Impurity caused by Discharge
Positive Commandment 105
• 1 Chapter A Day: Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 18
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 18
1 When a person lends money to a colleague without any stipulations, all of the borrower's property is on lien and bound to the debt. Therefore, when the lender comes to collect his debt, he should demand payment from the debtor first. If the debtor does not have money, but is in possession of either landed or movable property, he may collect the debt from them with the borrower's consent. If the borrower did not give the property willingly, the lender should have the property expropriated by the court.
If the property in the borrower's possession was not equal in value to the amount stated in the promissory note, the lender may expropriate the debt from all the property that was in the borrower's possession, even though it is now sold or given as presents to others. The rationale is that since the borrower sold or gave away the property after it was subjugated to the lien of this debt, he may expropriate the property from the possession of purchasers or the recipients of the presents. This is called being toreif.
To what does the above apply? To landed property in the borrower's possession at the time of the loan. Property that the borrower acquired after the loan was given, by contrast, is not automatically on lien to the creditor, and he may not expropriate it from purchasers. If, however, the lender established the stipulation that all the property that the borrower will acquire afterwards will be on lien for him to collect the debt from it, property that the borrower acquired after taking the loan and subsequently sold or gave away may be expropriated by a creditor.אהמלוה את חבירו סתם הרי כל נכסיו אחראין וערבאין לחוב זה, לפיכך כשיבא לגבות תובע את בעל חובו תחלה אם מצא עמו נכסים בין מטלטלין בין קרקעות גובה מהן ברצון הלוה, ואם לא נתן הלוה מדעתו מגבין אותו ב"ד, לא הספיק לו כל הנמצא כנגד שטר חובו הרי זה גובה מכל הקרקעות שהיו ללוה אע"פ שהן עתה מכורין לאחרים או נתונים במתנה, הואיל ומכר הלוה או נתן אחר שנשתעבד בחוב זה ה"ז מוציא מיד הלקוחות או מיד בעלי המתנות וזהו הנקרא טורף, בד"א בקרקעות שהיו לו בעת שלוה, אבל נכסים הבאין לו לאחר שלוה לא נשתעבדו לב"ח ואינו טורפן, ואם התנה עליו שכל נכסים שיקנה יהיו משועבדין להפרע מהן וקנה אחר שלוה ומכר או נתן הרי בעל חוב טורף מהן.
2 The above statements apply only to landed property. Movable property that has been sold, by contrast, is not on lien to a debt. Even property in the borrower's possession at the time of the loan may not be expropriated by his creditor.
If the debtor transferred a lien to all his movable property by virtue of the lien on landed property so that the creditor can expropriate everything, he may expropriate that movable property. This applies only when he writes in the promissory note: "I have transferred to you a lien on my movable property by virtue of the lien on my landed property. This is not an asmachta, nor is this a standard form of a legal document."
Similarly, he may write: "All of the property that I will purchase in the future, whether landed property or movable property, is on lien to you so that you can expropriate payment from it, and the lien on my movable property is transferred to you by virtue of the lien on my landed property, so that you can expropriate payment from them. This is not an asmachta, nor is this a standard form of a legal document." In such an instance, the creditor may expropriate even the movable property that the borrower purchased after he borrowed the money. The rationale is that any stipulation made concerning a financial transaction is binding.באין כל הדברים אמורין אלא בקרקע אבל המטלטלין אין עליהן אחריות אפילו מטלטלין שהיו לו בעת שלוה שמכרן לשעתו אין בעל חוב טורף אותן, הקנה לבעל חובו כל המטלטלין על גב קרקע שיש לו להיותו נפרע מן הכל הרי זה טורף מאותן המטלטלין והוא שיכתוב לו בשטר חובו שהקניתי לך מטלטלין שיש לי על גב הקרקע שיש לי שלא כאסמכתא ושלא כטופסי השטרות, וכן אם כתב שכל נכסים שאני עתיד לקנות בין קרקעות בין מטלטלין הרי הן משועבדים לך להפרע מהן והמטלטלין קנויין לך על גב הקרקעות להפרע מהן שלא כאסמכתא ושלא כטופסי השטרות ה"ז טורף אף מן המטלטלין שקנה הלוה לאחר שלוה שכל תנאי שבממון קיים.
3 The following laws apply when a person designates a field of his as an ipotiki for a creditor for a debt, or for a woman for her ketubah - i.e., he composed a legal document stating that they should collect payment from that source - and a river flooded the field. The creditor may expropriate other property as payment for the debt. If, however, it was stipulated that he should not derive payment from any place other than this, he should not expropriate other property.
Similarly, if a person borrowed money and explicitly stipulated that his property is not on lien to the debt, the creditor may never collect this debt from property that has been sold to others.געשה שדהו אפותיקי לבעל חובו או לאשה בכתובתה והוא שיכתוב להן מכאן תגבו ושטפו נהר ה"ז גובה משאר נכסים וטורף אותן, ואם התנה עמו שלא יהיה לו פרעון אלא מזו אינו גובה משאר נכסים, וכן אם לוה ממנו ופירש שאין לו אחריות עליו הרי זה אינו גובה מן המשועבדין לעולם.
4 When a person designates a field of his as an ipotiki for a creditor for a debt, or for a woman for her ketubah and then sells it, the sale is binding. If when the creditor comes to collect his debt, he does not find any property that has not been sold, he may expropriate the field that had been designated from the person who purchased it.
When does the above apply? When the debtor sold the field for a limited amount of time. If, however, he desired to sell it forever, the sale is not binding.דעשה שדהו אפותיקי לבעל חובו או לאשה בכתובתה ומכרה ה"ז מכורה וכשיבא ב"ח לגבות אם לא ימצא נכסים בני חורין יטרוף אותה, בד"א בשמכר לשעתה אבל מכרה ממכר עולם אינה מכורה.
5 When a person designates a servant as an ipotiki, a creditor can expropriate the servant in payment of the debt even if he was sold to another person. ' The rationale is that the matter will be publicized. If he designates his cow as an ipotiki, a creditor may not expropriate the cow. The same ruling applies with regard to other movable property, for the matter will not be publicized.העשה עבדו אפותיקי ומכרו הרי בעל חוב גובה ממנו מפני שיש לו קול, עשה שורו אפותיקי ומכרו אין ב"ח גובה ממנו וכן שאר המטלטלין מפני שאין להן קול.
6 When a master designates his servant as an ipotiki and then frees him, he obtains his freedom. This applies even if he wrote in the promissory note: "You will not receive payment from any source but this."
Similar rules apply if he consecrates the servant. The rationale is that [the prohibition against leaven, freeing a servant and consecration remove the lien from an article.
The creditor may collect his debt from the debtor. If he does not have the means to pay him, he must compose a promissory note acknowledging his debt, and with that promissory note he can expropriate property that was sold by the debtor after the date of this second promissory note.
Why is he obligated to pay the debt? Because he caused his colleague's money to be lost. And whenever a person causes a colleague a loss, he must make financial restitution, as explained in the appropriate place.
We also compel the servant's second master to free him as well. This is a measure enacted for the correction of society, lest the creditor encounter the servant in the marketplace at a later time and say: "You are my slave."ועבד שעשאהו רבו אפותיקי ושחררו אע"פ שכתב לו לא יהיה לך פרעון אלא מזה יצא לחירות, וכן אם הקדישו שהחמץ והשחרור וההקדש מפקיעין מיד שיעבוד והרי ב"ח גובה חובו מן הלוה וכותב עליו שטר בחובו וטורף מזמן זה השטר, ולמה הוא חייב לשלם מפני שגורם לאבד ממון חבירו וכל הגורם להזיק משלם כמו שבארנו במקומו, וכופין את רבו השני לשחררו מפני תקון העולם שלא ימצאנו בשוק ויאמר לו עבדי אתה.
7 When a person consecrates his property, the creditor cannot expropriate the property from the Temple treasury, for the consecration of property lifts the lien from it.
When the property is redeemed from the Temple treasury, we estimate how much a person would desire to give for this field, so that the creditor will be paid his due, or the woman the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. Therefore, when the field is redeemed and becomes unconsecrated property in the possession of the purchaser, the creditor can come and expropriate his debt from it, or the woman can take it as payment for the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, as we have explained in Hilchot Arachin.זהמקדיש נכסיו אין בעל חוב יכול לטרוף מן ההקדש שההקדש מפקיע השיעבוד וכשפודין הקרקע מיד ההקדש אומדין כמה אדם רוצה ליתן בשדה זו על מנת שיתן לבעל חוב את חובו ולאשה כתובתה, לפיכך לכשתפדה ותצא לחולין ביד הלוקח יבא בעל חוב ויטרוף אותה או האשה בכתובתה כמו שביארנו בערכין.
8 When a creditor comes to expropriate a field from the purchaser, if the purchaser has money in his possession, he may eliminate the creditor's claim by paying him the money for which he is expropriating the field. The purchaser then demands repayment from the seller. If, however, the debtor had designated the field as an ipotiki, the purchaser may not eliminate the creditor's claim by paying him.חבעל חוב שבא לטרוף אם יש מעות ללוקח יכול לסלקו וליתן לו דמי מה שהוא טורף וחוזר הלוקח ותובע למוכר, ואם עשה אותו אפותיקי אינו יכול לסלקו בדמים.
9 The purchaser is also given the upper hand in the following situation: Reuven owed Shimon 200 zuz. Reuven owned two fields. He sold one to Levi for a maneh, and then sold him the other one for a second maneh. Shimon expropriated one for a maneh and then sought to expropriate the other for the second maneh that was owed him. Levi brought 200 zuz in coin and told Shimon: "If you desire to consider the field that you already expropriated as payment for the entire 200 zuz that you are owed, that is acceptable. If not, here are the 200 zuz of the debt; rescind your claim." Levi is given the upper hand.
If Shimon accepted Levi's proposition and kept the one field, Levi cannot demand payment from Reuven for more than one maneti, despite the fact that Shimon accepted it as compensation for 200 zuz.טראובן שהיה חייב לשמעון מאתים והיו לו שתי שדות ומכר אחת מהן ללוי במנה וחזר ומכר לו השניה במנה ובא שמעון וטרף אחת במנה וחזר לטרוף השניה במנה הנשאר לו והביא לו מאתים ואמר לו אם תרצה להיות השדה שטרפת שומה לך בכל המאתים שיש לך הרי מוטב ואם לאו הילך מאתים של חובך והסתלק הדין עם לוי, רצה שמעון ועמד בה אע"פ שקבלה במאתים אין לוי חוזר ותובע ראובן אלא במנה.
10 The creditor, by contrast, is given the upper hand in the following situation. Reuven owed Shimon 200 zuz. Reuven died and left one field that was worth 100 zuz. Shimon came and expropriated it. The orphans gave Shimon 100 zuz worth from the movable property that their father left, and thus removed Shimon from it. Shimon may, however, return and expropriate it for the remainder of his debt. The rationale is that by giving him the 100 zuz, they performed a mitzvah, for it is a mitzvah for heirs to pay their father's debt.
If the heirs told Shimon: "This 100 is for the field you expropriated," he cannot come back and expropriate it again for the remainder of the money owed him.
ימת ראובן והניח שדה אחת שוה מאה ובא שמעון וטרפה ונתנו לו היתומים מאה מן המטלטלין שהניח אביהן וסילקוהו ה"ז חוזר וטורף אותה בשאר חובו שמאה שנתנו לו מצוה עשו שמצוה על היתומים לפרוע חובות אביהם, ואם אמרו לו אלו במאה דמי השדה שטרפת אינו יכול לחזור ולטרוף אותה פעם אחרת בשאר חובו.
• 3 Chapters A Day: She'ar Avot haTum'ah She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 15, She'ar Avot haTum'ah She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 16, She'ar Avot haTum'ah She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 17
English Text | Hebrew Text
 Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 15
1 What is meant by a doubt concerning a point of Rabbinic Law? For example, if there is a doubt whether or not a person ate impure foods or drank impure liquids, or there is a doubt whether or not a person inserted his head and the majority of his body in drawn water or three lugim of drawn water fell upon him, he is pure. Similarly, if a person ate impure foods or drank impure liquids or inserted his head and the majority of his body in drawn water or had three lugim of drawn water fall upon him and then a question arose whether or not he touched particular pure entities, those pure entities remain pure. Similarly, if he ate foods that are questionably impure or drank liquids that are questionably impure, he is deemed pure. Similarly, one who partakes of terumah whose status is held in abeyance, is pure. Similarly, in all analogous situations where there is a question regarding the status of derivatives of impurity, the person or the object is deemed pure.
If, however, there is a question regarding a source of impurity, even one of Rabbinic origin, the person or the object is deemed impure unless the source of impurity was itself of doubtful status, e.g., a beit hapras or the earth of the Diaspora. Terumah is not burned because of a doubt whether it touched such substances, as was explained.אספק ד"ס כיצד ספק אכל אוכלין טמאין ושתה משקין טמאין ספק שלא אכל ושלא שתה ספק שבא ראשו ורובו במים שאובין או שנפלו עליו שלשה לוגין מים שאובין ספק שלא בא ושלא נפלו ה"ז טהור וכן אם אכל אוכלין טמאין או שתה משקין טמאין או בא במים שאובין או נפלו עליו שלשה לוגין מים שאובין וספק נגע בטהרות אלו ספק לא נגע הרי טהרות אלו טהורות וכן האוכל ספק אוכלין טמאים והשותה משקין שהן טמאים בספק ה"ז טהור וכן האוכל תרומה תלויה טהור וכן כל כיוצא באלו מולדי טומאות שהן מד"ס ספיקן טהור אבל אב [הטומאה] שהוא מד"ס ספיקו טמא אלא אם כן היה האב עצמו טמא בספק כגון בית הפרס וארץ העמים שאין שורפין על ספק מגען כמו שביארנו:
2 What is meant by the principle: a doubt that arises regarding ordinary food, i.e., the purity of the food prepared by those who partake of ordinary foods in a state of purity, the people called perushim?
When a question arises regarding the purity of the ordinary food that is treated as pure by people who partake of ordinary foods in a state of purity, the objects are deemed pure. This applies with regard to all questions that arise. Only when impurity is definite is it of consequence in such instances.בספק החולין היא טהרת אוכלי חוליהן בטהרה והן הנקראים פרושים כיצד אוכלי חוליהן בטהרה שנולד להן ספק טומאה בטהרותיהן הרי אלו טהורים ככל הספיקות כולן ואין להן טומאה אלא טומאה ודאית:
3 What is meant by the principle: a doubt that arises concerning sacrifices? If a person lacking atonement was in doubt regarding an obligation to bring five sacrifices, e.g., a woman who was in doubt regarding five situations that could have rendered her impure due to zivah or due to childbirth, she may bring only one sacrifice. Afterwards, she is pure with regard to partaking of sacrificial foods. The remainder of the offerings are not considered as obligations that must be fulfilled, as explained in Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah.גספק הקרבנות כיצד מחוסר כיפורים שיש עליו ספק חמשה קרבנות כגון האשה שיש עליה ספק חמש זיבות או ספק חמש לידות מביאין קרבן אחד וטהור לאכול בקדשים ואין השאר עליו חובה כמו שביארנו בהלכות מחוסרי כפרה:
4 What is meant by a doubt concerning tzara'at blemishes? Until a person is categorized as impure, with regard to all questions concerning his status, he is considered as pure, as explained in Hilchot Negayim, ch. 6.דספק נגעים כיצד עד שלא נזקק לטומאה ספיקו טהור כמו שביארנו בפ"ו מהלכות נגעים:
5 What is meant by a doubt when a person afflicted with tzara'at stood still or passed? When a person afflicted with tzara'at was sitting under a tree, a person who was ritually pure passed by, and there was a question whether or not he passed under the tree, he is pure. This ruling also applies if a person who was ritually pure was sitting under a tree, a person afflicted with tzara'at passed under the tree, and there was a question whether or not he stood still.הספק עומד ועובר כיצד מצורע שיושב תחת האילן והטהור עובר ספק האהיל עליו האילן וטמא ספק לא האהיל עליו וכן אם היה הטהור יושב תחת האילן והמצורע עובר תחתיו ספק עמד המצורע ונטמא הטהור ספק לא עמד ספיקו טהור:
6 What is meant by a doubt concerning the carcass of a creeping animal, i.e., a creeping animal that was thrown? One threw the carcass of a creeping animal or another impure entity among loaves of bread and, in both instances, when there is a question whether or not the pure loaf was touched by impurity, they are considered as pure. The rationale is that the status of all questions of ritual impurity depends on the situation at the time the matter is discovered. We do not say: Maybe it touched the pure or impure object and then fell to its side? Instead, the ruling is given according to its state when it was discovered.וספק שרצים זה ספק הנזרקין כיצד זרק שרץ או דבר טמא לבין הככרות או שזרק ככר לבין הטמאות וספק נגע ספק לא נגע הרי זה טהור הואיל ומצא הככר הטהור שאינו נוגע בטומאה שכל הטומאות כשעת מציאתן ואין אומרין שמא נגע בו ואח"כ נפל בצדו אלא הרי הן כשעת מציאתן:
7 When there was a carcass of a creeping animal in the mouth of a mole that was walking over loaves of bread that were terumah and there was a question whether or not the carcass touched the loaves, it is pure, because the impurity did not come to rest. If the mole was walking on the loaves and touching them with the teeming animal, but there was a question whether or not it was alive, the loaves are pure.
When does the above apply? When the mole seized the creeping animal when it was alive and then departed. If, however, the creeping animal was discovered dead in the mole's mouth, the loaves are impure. If, however, it was seen to be alive while it was in the mole's mouth even though it was discovered dead in front of it afterwards, the loaves are pure.
Similarly, when there is a carcass of a creeping animal in the mouth of a mole and the carcass of an animal in the mouth of a dog and they passed between pure substances or pure substances passed between them, the status of the pure substances does not change despite the question. This leniency is granted, because the impurity does not have a fixed place. If they were pecking with them on the ground, they are considered to have been placed in a fixed position and they impart impurity retroactively because of the doubt if they were located in a private domain, as will be explained.זהשרץ בפי החולדה ומהלכת על גבי ככרות של תרומה ספק נגע ספק לא נגע ספיקו טהור מפני שלא נחה הטומאה היתה מהלכת בו ונוגעת בככרות ספק חי ספק מת הרי הן טהורות במה דברים אמורים בזמן שנטלתו והלכה לה אבל אם נמצא מת בפיה הרי אלו טמאות ראוהו חי בפיה אף על פי שמצאוהו מת בפיה הרי אלו טהורות וכן השרץ בפי החולדה והנבילה בפי הכלב ועברו בין הטהורים או שעברו טהורים ביניהן ספיקו טהור מפני שאין לטומאה מקום קבוע היו מנקרין בהן על הארץ הרי הן כמונחין ומטמאין למפרע מספק אם היו ברשות היחיד כמו שיתבאר:
8 What is meant by a doubt that arose in the public domain? When impurity was located in the public domain and there is a doubt whether a person or a substance touched it or not, it is considered to be pure. If such a situation arose in a private domain and there is a doubt whether a person or a substance touched it or not, it is considered to be impure.
All of these questionable situations which the Sages ruled as pure are given that status even if the situation occurs in a private domain, because the objects involved do not have the knowledge to inquire regarding their status, as will be explained.חספק ר"ה כיצד טומאה שמונחת בר"ה ספק נגע בה ספק לא נגע ספיקו טהור היתה ברה"י וספק נגע בה ספק לא נגע ספיקו טמא וכל אלו הספיקות שטהרו חכמים אפילו ברה"י מפני שאין בהן דעת להשאל כמו שיתבאר:
9 What is meant by a doubt involving two domains? An impure entity was located in a private domain and there was a pure entity in a public domain or vice versa and a person touched one of them, but did not know which one he touched, he is pure. The same ruling applies if he moved one of them and did not know which one he moved if the impure entity would impart impurity when carried or one of them would impart impurity when one holds a portion of his body over it and he held a portion of his body over one of them, but does not know which one. Even though this involves a doubt in the public domain, he is considered as pure.
When he inquires about his status, we tell him: "If you immerse, you have not lost anything." If he immerses, it is praiseworthy. If he does not immerse and touches entities that are pure, they remain pure, because when there is a doubt in the public domain, the entity is considered as pure.טספק שתי רשויות כיצד היה דבר טמא ברה"י ודבר טהור בר"ה או שהיה הדבר להפך ונגע באחד מהם ואין ידוע באי זה מהן נגע או שהסיט את אחד מהן ואין ידוע אי זה הסיט אם היה הדבר הטמא מטמא במשא או שהיה אחד מהן מטמא באהל והאהיל על אחד מהן ואין ידוע אי זה מהן האהיל ה"ז טהור אף על פי שספק ר"ה טהור כשיבוא לישאל אומרין לו אם טבלת אין בכך הפסד אם טבל ה"ז משובח ואם לא טבל ועשה טהרות הרי הן טהורות שספק רשות הרבים טהור:
10 When the carcass of a creeping animal that was burnt was found on food, or a garment that was worn out or a needle that was broken or rusty was found among keilim, the keilim are pure. This applies whether they are found in a public domain or a private domain. We do not say, perhaps the carcass was burnt only after it came into contact with the foods or after the keilim contracted ritual impurity because of contact with the garment or the needle, the needle broke or became rusty and the garment became worn out. For we follow the principle: the status of all questions of ritual impurity depends on the situation at the time the matter is discovered.ישרץ שנמצא שרוף ומונח ע"ג אוכלין וכן טלית שנמצאת בלויה ומחט שנמצאת שבורה או חלודה בין הכלים הרי אלו טהורין בין בר"ה בין ברה"י ואין אומרין שמא אחר שנגע באוכלין נשרף ואחר שנטמאו הכלים במגע הטלית והמחט נשברה או החלידה ובלתה הטלית עד שטהרה שכל הטומאות כשעת מציאתן:
11 The following rules apply when two witnesses tell a person: "You contracted impurity," and he says: "I am pure.' His word is accepted with regard to his own status. Nevertheless, we do not tell him to involve himself with pure articles, but if he did involve himself with pure articles, they are pure, but he should take his own precautions.
If one witness says: "He became impure," and two witnesses state: "He did not become impure," whether this occurred in a public domain or a private domain, he is pure. If two witnesses say: "He became impure," and one witness states: "He did not become impure," whether this occurred in a public domain or a private domain, he is impure. When one witness says: "He became impure," and one witness states: "He did not become impure," if this occurred in a private domain, he is impure. If this occurred in a public domain, he is pure.יאשני עדים אומרין לו נטמא והוא אומר טהור אני הוא נאמן על ידי עצמו ואעפ"כ אין אומרין לו עסוק בטהרות אלא אם עשה טהרות הרי הן טהורות ויחוש לעצמו עד אומר נטמא ושנים אומרים לא נטמא בין ברשות הרבים בין ברה"י טהור שנים אומרים נטמא ועד אחד אומר לא נטמא בין ברשות היחיד בין ברשות הרבים ה"ז נטמא עד אומר נטמא ועד אומר לא נטמא אשה אומרת נטמא ואשה אומרת לא נטמא ברה"י טמא ברשות הרבים טהור:
She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 16
1 Why did the Sages rule that when there is a question of impurity in the public domain, the person should be considered pure? Because the community offers the Paschal sacrifice in a state of impurity when the majority of the people are impure. Now, if ritual impurity that was definitely established is superseded by the presence of the community, certainly this would apply to a mere question of the presence of impurity. For all stringencies observed because of doubt were instituted by the Sages, as we explained in Hilchot Bi'ot Assurot.
Why did they rule stringently concerning a doubt in a private domain? For in the instance of a sotah who entered into privacy with the person concerning whom she was warned, even though there is only a doubt that she committed adultery, she is considered as impure with regard to her husband until she drinks the sotah waters.אמפני מה טהרו חכמים ספק טומאה בר"ה שהרי הציבור עושין פסח בטומאה בזמן שהטמאים מרובין אם טומאה ודאית נדחית מפניהן קל וחומר לספק טומאה שאיסור כל הספקות מדבריהן כמו שביארנו בהלכות ביאות אסורות ומפני מה החמירו בספק רה"י שהרי סוטה שנסתרה אף ע"פ שהדבר ספק הרי היא טמאה לבעלה עד שתשתה:
2 Just as a sotah and the person suspected of relations with her are two, so too, when there are questions of impurity that involve two individuals, it is assumed that the person or the article is not pure. If, however, there are three people in a private domain, when there is a question concerning impurity that occurs there, it is assumed that the person or the article is pure, as if the question arose in the public domain.
When does the above apply? When the person who could have contracted impurity has the knowledge to be asked and be examined regarding the details that occurred, as is true with regard to a sotah. When, however, there is a deafmute, an emotionally or intellectually compromised person, or a minor who does not know the details and is unable to respond to questions that are asked involved in a private domain, if a doubtful situation arises, it is assumed that the person or the article is pure.
What is implied? When a deafmute, an emotionally or intellectually compromised person, or a minor who does not know how to respond to questions are found in a courtyard or an alley where there is impurity and there is a question whether or not they came in contact with it, they are considered as pure. Similarly, in all instances where no one has the knowledge to respond to questions, even though the question arises in a private domain, they are considered as pure.בוכשם שהסוטה ובועלה שנים כך ספק טומאה בשנים אבל אם היו שלשה ברה"י הרי ספק טומאתן שם טהור כר"ה בד"א כשהיה זה שנטמא בספק יש בו דעת להשאל ולדרוש ממנו מה אירע לו כסוטה אבל אם היה חרש או שוטה או קטן שאינו יודע להשיב על הענין כששואלין אותו הרי ספיקו טהור כיצד חרש או שוטה או קטן שאין בו דעת להשאל שנמצאו בחצר או במבוי שיש שם טומאה וספק נגעו וספק לא נגעו הרי אלו טהורין וכן כל שאין בו דעת להשאל אע"פ שנולד לו הספק ברה"י ספיקו טהור:
3 When a person is blind, sleeping, or walking at night, if there is a question whether or not they contracted impurity in a private domain, they are impure, because they have the knowledge to respond to questions.
When do we apply the principle that whenever there is a question involving one who does not have the knowledge to respond to questions, it is assumed that the person or the article is pure? When the possibilities are equally balanced and there is no established presumption regarding its status. If, however, it is known that, in a given situation, one could be assumed to have contracted impurity, he is considered impure.
What is implied? An impure child was standing next to some dough and there was also dough on his hand, the dough is deemed impure, for a child's habit is to pat dough and it can be assumed that he did so. Nevertheless, terumah should not be burnt because of this assumption.גהסומא והישן והמהלך בלילה ספיקן ברה"י טמא מפני שיש בו דעת להשאל במה דברים אמורים שכל שאין בו דעת לישאל ספיקו טהור בשהיה הדבר שקול ואין שם חזקה אבל אם היה הדבר ידוע שחזקתו שנטמא ה"ז טמא כיצד תינוק טמא שנמצא בצד העיסה והבצק בידו הרי העיסה טמאה שדרך התינוק לטפח ובכך היא חזקתו ואין שורפין על חזקה זו:
4 When impure liquids, a pure dough that is terumah, and domesticated animals, beasts, or fowl were all located in the same place, and teeth marks were found in the dough, it is presumed that the animals drank the liquids and then bit the dough and thus imparted impurity to it. If a cow was there and the distance between the liquids and the dough was sufficient for the cow to wipe its tongue on its lips, the dough is pure. The same principle applies with regard to other animals if there was enough place for the animals to dry their mouths with their tongues. If there is less space than this, the dough is impure. If a dog was there, the dough is pure even if it is located next to the liquids, for it is not the habit of a dog to leave food and go to water.
The following laws apply if there are signs of chickens pecking at the dough. If there is enough space between the liquids and the dough for them to dry their mouths on the ground, the dough is pure. If not, it is not, for it can be assumed that they drank and pecked at the dough while the liquids were still in their mouths.
When does the above apply? When the water is clear enough for a child's shadow to be recognized in them. If, however, the water was murky, the dough is pure, because if the chickens pecked with the liquids, the marks of the liquid would be observable in the dough. If the liquid was clear, although the dough is assumed to be impure, it should not be burnt due to this assumption. Instead, the determination of its status is held in abeyance.דהיו משקין טמאין ובצק טהור ובהמה או חיה או עופות בבית ונמצא בבצק מקום נשיכתן חזקה ששתו משקין ונשכו בבצק וטמאוהו היתה שם פרה ובין המשקין והבצק כדי שתלחך את לשונה הרי הבצק טהור ובשאר כל הבהמה כדי שתנגב את פיה פחות מזה הבצק טמא ואם היה כלב אפילו היו משקין בצד הבצק ה"ז טהור שאין דרכו של כלב להניח המזון ולילך לו אל המים נמצא בבצק נקירת התרנגולין אם יש בין המשקין והבצק כדי שינגבו את פיהן בארץ הבצק טהור ואם לאו טמא שחזקתן ששתו וניקרו בבצק במשקין שבפיהם בד"א בשהיו המשקין צלולין שבבואה של תינוק ניכרת בהן אבל עכורים הבצק טהור שאילו נקרו במשקין היה מקום המשקין ניכר בבצק אם היו צלולין אף על פי שהבצק בחזקת טומאה אין שורפין על חזקה זו אלא תולין:
5 What is an example of a presumption due to which terumah is burnt when a question of impurity arises in a private domain? There is a dough in a house, both creeping animals and frogs are becoming stuck in it, and pieces of their flesh was found in the dough. If most of those becoming stuck in the dough are creeping animals, the dough is deemed impure and should be burnt. If the majority are frogs, it is deemed as pure.האיזו היא חזקה ששורפין עליה ברשות היחיד עיסה בבית ושרצים וצפרדעים מטפלין שם ונמצאו חתיכות מבשרן בעיסה אם רוב המטפלים שרצים העיסה טמאה ותשרף ואם הרוב צפרדעים טהורה:
6 The following rules apply when there were pure substances next to or above sources of impurity and when a person clothed himself in his garment, a question arose whether it touched the impurity and the pure substances or not. If this took place in a private domain, it is deemed impure because of the doubt, because when there is a question of impurity that arises due to human activity, they can be questioned concerning it. Even if there is an k'li placed on the ground, it is considered as if there is someone to be questioned about it. If the pure substances and the source of impurity were in a public domain and a question arises, the substances are deemed pure. If it is impossible that the garment did not touch both of them, even though there is some doubt, the substances are deemed impure.והיו טמאות וטהרות בצדו או למעלה ממנו ונתעטף בטליתו וספק נגעו ספק לא נגעו בעת שנתעטף אם היו ברשות היחיד ספיקו טמא שספק טומאה הבאה בידי אדם נשאלין עליה אפילו בכלי המונח על גבי קרקע הרי הוא כמי שיש בו דעת לישאל ואם היו ברשות הרבים ספיקו טהור ואם אי אפשר שלא יגע ספיקו טמא:
7 When a loaf of bread that is terumah is positioned on a board and a support that contracted impurity from a zav is positioned below it in a manner in which it is impossible for the loaf to fall without touching the support, even though the support is inclined, should one find the loaf in another place, its status of purity remains unchanged, for it is possible to say that another person came, took it, and put it in that place. If one can say: "I am certain that no person came here," it is impure, because it certainly fell and touched the support when it fell.זככר של תרומה שנתון על גבי הדף ומדרס נתון תחתיו ואי אפשר לו כשיפול שלא יגע במדרס אע"פ שהוא במקום מדרון ובא ומצא הככר במקום אחר הרי הוא בטהרתו שאני אומר אדם בא ונטלו ונתנו במקום זה ואם אמר ברי לי שלא בא אדם לכאן טמא שודאי נפל ונגע במדרס כשנפל:
8 When a child is found standing next to a cemetery holding roses, even when there are roses only in the place of impurity, he is pure because there is a doubt; it is possible that another person gathered them and gave them to him.
Similarly, when a donkey is standing in a cemetery, the keilim on him are pure. We do not say that he pressed himself against them when lying on the ground and touched a grave while doing so. The rationale for both instances is that the child and the donkey do not have the knowledge to respond to questions. Hence, we follow the principle that all questions of impurity are judged according to the circumstances at the time that they were discovered.חתינוק שנמצא בצד בית הקברות והשושנים בידו אף על פי שאין שם שושנים אלא במקום הטומאה ספיקו טהור שמא אחר ליקטן ונתנם לו וכן חמור העומד בבית הקברות כליו טהורין ואין אומרין שמא נתמעך בהן ונגעו בקבר מפני שאין בו דעת לישאל וכשנמצאו לא נמצאו נוגעין וכל הטומאות כשעת מציאתן:
9 When a child was holding his father's hand or was riding on his father's shoulders, he is deemed impure with regard to any question concerning ritual impurity that arises in a private domain, for his father could be asked with regard to his status.טתינוק שהיה תופש בידו של אביו או שהיה רוכב על גבי כתיפו של אביו ספיקו ברה"י טמא מפני שאביו נשאל עליו:
10 There are four questionable situations that our Sages discussed with regard to a child:
a) When a child cannot walk and his mother placed him down in one place and found him as he was in that place, he is pure. We do not say that perhaps an impure woman came and kissed him and hugged him.
b) When the child matured to the extent that he began to leave one domain and enter others on his own, his clothes are pure. They are not considered as a midras as are the clothes of unlearned people. Nevertheless, as an initial preference, they should not be brought into contact with pure entities.
c) If he matured to the extent that he has the knowledge to answer questions, in a private domain, whenever there is a doubt whether he contracted impurity, he is considered as impure.
d) If he matured to the extent that he has the knowledge to guard his body from contracting impurity, one may partake of pure foods that touched his body. If he has the knowledge to guard his hands, pure foods that touched them may be eaten.
How do we check him? He is immersed and given ordinary food which he is told to treat as terumah. If he has the knowledge to guard his body, one may partake of pure foods that touched his body. If he has the knowledge to guard his hands, pure foods that touched them may be eaten.יוארבעה ספיקות אמרו חכמים בתינוק תינוק שאינו יכול להלך שהניחתו אמו ובאה ומצאתו כמו שהוא במקומו טהור ואין אומרין שמא טומאה באה ונשקתו וגפפתו התחיל התינוק לצאת ולהכניס בגדיו טהורין ואין מדרס כשאר בגדי עם הארץ ואע"פ שהן טהורין אין עושין על גביהן טהרות הגדיל עד שיהיה בו דעת לישאל ספיקו טמא ברה"י הגדיל עד שיהיה בו דעת לשמור את גופו אוכלין על גופו טהרות יודע לשמור את ידיו אוכלין על גבן טהרות כיצד בודקין אותו מטבילין אותו ונותנין לו חולין לשם תרומה אם יודע לשמור את גופו אוכלין אגב גופו טהרות ואם יודע לשמור את ידיו אוכלים אגב ידו טהרות:
She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 17
1 When there is an olive-sized portion of a human corpse in the mouth of a raven and there is a doubt whether or not it flew over a person or keilim in a private domain, the person is impure because of the doubt, provided he has the knowledge to respond to questions. The keilim are pure, because they do not have the capacity to respond to questions.
Similarly, when a person was drawing water with one container and pouring it into ten others and the carcass of a creeping animal was found in one of the ten, that container is impure and the others are pure. Although there is a question whether they are all impure, for perhaps the the carcass of the creeping animal had been in the container used to draw water, we rule leniently, because keilim are involved and they do not have the capacity to respond to questions. If the container with which he drew the water possessed a rim, since it is possible for the water to have been poured out, but for the carcass of the creeping animal to have remained, they are all impure.
Similarly, when one draws water with ten buckets, one after the other, and pours the water into ten containers, each bucket into a separate container, and it is not known which container was first and which was last, if the carcass of a creeping animal was found in one of them, the other nine containers and the ten buckets are pure, for one could say perhaps the carcass of the creeping animal was in the container originally. If the buckets have rims, all of the buckets and all of the containers are impure.
When one pours from one container to another and the carcass of a creeping animal is found in the lower container, the upper container is pure. We do not say that it fell from the upper container. Instead, it is possible that it had been in the lower container. The rationale for this leniency is that keilim are involved and they do not have the capacity of responding to questions. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.אכזית מן המת בפי העורב ספק האהיל על האדם ועל הכלים ברה"י ספק שלא האהיל הרי האדם טמא מספק והוא שיהיה בו דעת לישאל והכלים טהורים מפני שאין להן דעת לישאל וכן הממלא בכלי ונתן בעשרה כלים ונמצא השרץ באחד מהן הוא טמא והכלים טהורין אף על פי שכולן ספק שמא השרץ בכלי שמילא בו היה תחלה מפני שהן כלים ואין בהן דעת לישאל ואם היה לכלי שמילא בו אזנים הואיל ואפשר שיצאו המים ויתאחר בו השרץ כולן טמאים וכן הממלא בעשרה דליים זה אחר זה ונתן בעשרה כלים מדלי אחד לכלי אחר ואין ידוע הראשון מן האחרון ונמצא השרץ בכלי אחד מהן הרי התשעה כלים עם עשרת הדליים טהורין שאני אומר שמא בכלי זה היה השרץ מתחלתו ואם יש לדליים אזנים הרי כל הדליים עם כל הכלים טמאין המערה מכלי לכלי ונמצא השרץ בתחתון העליון טהור ואין אומרין מהעליון נפל אלא שמא בתחתון היה מפני שהן כלים ואין להן דעת לישאל וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
2 The following laws apply when there was a container that was used for pure substances and the carcass of a creeping animal was found in it. If it has a base or it has a rim, even if it does not have a base, all of the pure substances that were contained in it are impure. This applies even if it was checked before the substances were placed in it and covered afterwards, lest the the carcass of the creeping animal fell there when he lifted up his hand after checking.
Even if one used it for pure substances in one corner and then moved it to another corner and the carcass of the creeping animal was discovered inside, all the pure substances are impure. For the assumption that impurity was present in an article is not changed when that article is moved from place to place. All the above applies with regard to holding the status of the pure substances in abeyance, but not to burn them.בקופה שנשתמש בה בטהרות ונמצא בה שרץ אם יש לה שוליים או אזנים אע"פ שאין לה שוליים הרי כל הטהרות שנשתמשו בה טמאות אפילו היה בדוקה ומכוסה שמא עם הגבהת ידו מן הבדיקה נפל השרץ ואפילו נשתמש בה בטהרות בזוית זו וטלטלה לזוית אחרת ונמצא בה השרץ כולן טמאות לפי שמחזיקין טומאה ממקום למקום לתלות אבל לא לשרוף:
3 The following laws apply when a person draws liquids from a cistern and fills barrels from them. If he would immerse each and every barrel in the cistern to fill them and a carcass of a creeping animal was found in the first one, they are all impure. If it was found in the last one, it alone is impure and all the others are pure. The rationale is that we surmise that the creeping animal fell into the cistern after the first barrels were filled.
If he was drawing the liquids with one container and pouring them into barrels until they were full and a carcass of a creeping animal was found in one of them, it alone is impure and all the others and the cistern are pure. The rationale is that it can be said that the carcass of the creeping animal fell into this one alone or it was there before the liquid was poured into it. Accordingly, if the person checked all the barrels, then poured wine into them, and covered them afterwards and the carcass of a creeping animal was found in one of them, they are all impure. Similarly, if the carcass of a creeping animal was found in the cistern or the container used to draw from it, everything is impure.גהזולף את הבור וממלא ממנו חביות אם היה משקיע כל חבית וחבית בבור וממלא אותן ונמצא השרץ בראשונה כולן טמאות נמצא באחרונה היא טמאה וכולן טהורות שאני אומר אחר שמילא את הראשונות נפל שרץ לבור היה זולף בכלי ונותן לתוך החביות עד שמלאן ונמצא השרץ באחת מהן היא בלבד טמאה וכולן טהורות שאני אומר בזו בלבד נפל השרץ או היה בה עד שלא זלף לתוכה לפיכך אם היה בודק כל חבית מהן ואחר כך נותן בה היין ומכסה אותה אחר שזולף לתוכה ונמצא השרץ באחת מהן כולן טמאות וכן אם נמצא השרץ בבור או בכלי שזולף בו הכל טמא:
4 When one would gather olives from the pit in which they were stored and bring them up to a roof to dry, if the carcass of a creeping animal was found on the roof, the olives in the pit are pure. If it was found in the pit, the pit and the olives contained there are impure. If the carcass was found in the pit between the wall and the olives, the olives are pure.
The following laws apply if the creeping animal was found in a mound of olives and the mound was on the roof. If this occurred within three days of the olives being placed there, the pit is also impure, for it can be said that the mound was taken from the pit with the creeping animal in it. If the creeping animal was found three days after the mound had been taken to the roof, the pit is pure, because maybe the olives became compressed and formed a mound within these three days.דהיה קוצה זיתים מן המעטן ומעלה אותן לגג ונמצא השרץ בגג זיתים שבמעטן טהורים נמצא במעטן המעטן טמא נמצא בין כותל לזיתים הזיתים טהורים נמצא השרץ בתוך גוש של זיתים והגוש בגג אם בתוך שלשת ימים אף המעטן טמא שאני אומר גוש זה מן המעטן עלה והשרץ בתוכו ואם נמצא אחר שלשה ימים משהעלה זיתים לגג הרי המעטן טהור שמא בגג נתקבצו ונעשו גוש בתוך השלשה ימים:
5 When a person breaks off a piece of dough from a larger quantity and the carcass of a creeping animal was found on the smaller piece, that piece alone is impure. If the carcass was found in the larger dough, only that dough is impure. If it was found in the midst of the smaller portion of dough, even the larger portion is impure.ההקורץ מקרצת מן העיסה ונמצא שרץ במקרצת המקרצת לבדה טמאה נמצא בעיסה העיסה לבדה טמאה נמצא בתוך המקרצת אף העיסה טמאה:
6 When the seed of impure food was found in a loaf of bread or on hot food, the loaf or the food are impure, even if there is no liquid present. For it can be said that the entire food fell there, but was dissolved - in the loaf or because of the boiling - and only the seed remained. If the seed was found on top of a loaf or in the midst of cold food, the loaf or the food are pure, even if there is liquid present. For it can be said that the seed alone fell into the loaf or the food after the impure was removed from it and the seed does not impart impurity.ואוכל טמא שנמצא גרעינה שלו בתוך הככר או על גבי תבשיל רותח אף על פי שאין עליה משקה טופח הרי הן טמאים שאני אומר האוכל כולו נפל שם ונימוח בתוך הככר או מחמת הרתיחה ונשארה גרעינתו נמצאת הגרעינה על גבי הככר או בתוך תבשיל צונן הרי אלו טהורין אף ע"פ שיש עליה משקה שאני אומר גרעינה זו לבדה נפלה אחר שאבד האוכל מעליה שהרי אינה מטמאה:
7 If there was pure food and impure food in a home and a seed was found inside a loaf of bread or in boiling food, the determination of its status is made according to the majority. Similarly, if there was pure blood and impure blood in a home and blood was found on food, the determination of its status is made according to the majority. An incident occurred with a loaf of bread that was terumah upon which blood was found. The incident was brought before the Sages and they ruled that the loaf was pure. For even if it could be said that the blood was that of a creeping animal, it is possible to say that it was the blood of a living creeping animal which is pure.זהיו בבית אוכלין טמאין ואוכלין טהורים ונמצאת גרעינה בבית הולכין אחר הרוב וכן אם היו דמים טהורים ודמים טמאים בתוך הבית ונמצא דם על האוכל הולכים אחר הרוב מעשה היה בככר של תרומה שנמצא עליו דם ובא מעשה לפני חכמים וטהרוהו שאפילו נאמר דם שרץ הוא הריני אומר דם שרץ חי הוא שהוא טהור:
8 When there are carcasses of both animals that died without ritual slaughter and slaughtered animals in a city, if meat is found in the streets of the city, the determination of its status is made according to the majority.
Similarly, if the carcass of an animal was found and there is a doubt whether it is a creeping animal or a frog, the determination of its status is made according to the majority of animals in that town at that time. This is the general principle: When a questionable entity is found, the determination of its status is made according to the majority.חעיר שיש בה נבלות ושחוטות בשר הנמצא בה הולכים אחר הרוב וכן אם היה הנמצא בה ספק שרץ ספק צפרדע הולכין אחר הרוב שיש באותה העיר באותו הזמן זה הכלל בנמצא הלך אחר הרוב:
9 When a woman was collecting fertilizer in a courtyard and the carcass of a creeping animal is found in the fertilizer, she is pure, because the carcass of a creeping animal does not impart impurity when carried. If it was found on top of the fertilizer, she is impure, for perhaps she touched it.
If she was sifting kernels of grain with a sieve and the carcass of a creeping animal was found in the kernels in the sieve, she is pure. If it is found on top of the sieve, she is considered impure because of the doubt, for perhaps she touched it. We follow the principle: whenever a question of impurity arises in a private domain, the person or object in question is deemed impure, as we explained.טהאשה שמגבבת גבבא בחצר ונמצא שרץ בתוך גבבה הרי זו טהורה שאין השרץ מטמא במשא נמצא על גבי גבבא הרי זו טמאה שמא נגעה בו היתה כוברת בכברה ונמצא שרץ בתוך הפירות שבכברה הרי זו טהורה נמצא על גבי הכברה הרי זו ספק טמאה שמא נגעה בו וכל ספק ברשות היחיד טמא כמו שביארנו:
|
No comments:
Post a Comment