ב"ה
| |||||
Today in Judaism: Tammuz 1, 5777 - Sunday, June 25, 2017 - chabad.org in New York, New York, United States - Today is Sunday, Tammuz 1, 5777 · June 25, 2017 - Rosh Chodesh Tammuz
Numbers 28:1 (v) Adonai said to Moshe, 2 “Give an order to the people of Isra’el. Tell them, ‘You are to take care to offer me at the proper time the food presented to me as offerings made by fire, providing a fragrant aroma for me.’ 3 Tell them, ‘This is the offering made by fire that you are to bring to Adonai: male lambs in their first year and without defect, two daily as a regular burnt offering. 4 Offer the one lamb in the morning and the other lamb at dusk, 5 along with two quarts of fine flour as a grain offering, mixed with one quart of oil from pressed olives. 6 It is the regular burnt offering, the same as was offered on Mount Sinai to give a fragrant aroma, an offering made by fire for Adonai. 7 Its drink offering is to be one-quarter hin for one lamb; in the Holy Place you are to pour out a drink offering of intoxicating liquor to Adonai. 8 The other lamb you are to present at dusk; present it with the same kind of grain offering and drink offering as in the morning; it is an offering made by fire, with a fragrant aroma for Adonai.
9 “‘On Shabbat offer two male lambs in their first year and without defect, with one gallon of fine flour as a grain offering, mixed with olive oil, and its drink offering. 10 This is the burnt offering for every Shabbat, in addition to the regular burnt offering and its drink offering.
11 “‘At each Rosh-Hodesh of yours, you are to present a burnt offering to Adonai consisting of two young bulls, one ram and seven male lambs in their first year and without defect; 12 with six quarts of fine flour mixed with olive oil as a grain offering for the one ram; 13 and two quarts of fine flour mixed with olive oil as a grain offering for each lamb. This will be the burnt offering giving a fragrant aroma, an offering made by fire for Adonai. 14 Their drink offerings will be two quarts of wine for a bull, one-and-one-third quarts for the ram, and one quart for each lamb. This is the burnt offering for every Rosh-Hodesh throughout the months of the year. 15 Also a male goat is to be offered as a sin offering to Adonai, in addition to the regular burnt offering and its drink offering.
Today's Laws & Customs:
• Rosh Chodesh Observances
Today is the second of the two Rosh Chodesh ("Head of the Month") days for the Hebrew month of "Tammuz" (when a month has 30 days, both the last day of the month and the first day of the following month serve as the following month's Rosh Chodesh).
Special portions are added to the daily prayers: Hallel (Psalms 113-118) is recited -- in its "partial" form -- following the Shacharit morning prayer, and the Yaaleh V'yavo prayer is added to the Amidah and to Grace After Meals; the additional Musaf prayer is said (when Rosh Chodesh is Shabbat, special additions are made to the Shabbat Musaf). Tachnun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted.
Many have the custom to mark Rosh Chodesh with a festive meal and reduced work activity. The latter custom is prevalent amongst women, who have a special affinity with Rosh Chodesh -- the month being the feminine aspect of the Jewish Calendar.
Links: The 29th Day; The Lunar Files
Today in Jewish History:
• Birth and Passing of Joseph (1562 and 1452 BCE)
Joseph, the son of the patriarch Jacob, was born in Charan (Mesopotamia) on the 1st of Tammuz of the year 2199 from creation (1562 BCE), the first child of Jacob's most beloved wife, Rachel, born after 7 childless years of marriage. He passed away on the same date 110 years later, in Egypt.
When Joseph was six years old, Jacob and his family returned to the Holy Land, eventually settling in Hebron. Though younger than 10 of his 11 brothers, he was his father's favorite, and a great rivalry existed between him and his brothers, whose animosity toward him increased when he related two dreams he had forecasting that he is destined to rule over them.
When Joseph was 17, he was sold into slavery by his brothers and taken to Egypt; when he refused the advances of his master's wife, she had him placed in prison, where he languished for 12 years. At age 30, he interpreted a pair of mysterious dreams dreamt by Pharaoh, and was appointed viceroy of Egypt to oversee the gathering and storage of grain in preparation for the seven years of famine that Pharaoh's dreams had predicted. He married Asnat, and had two children, Menasseh and Ephraim.
The great famine brought his brothers to Egypt to purchase grain; after subjecting them to a series of trials to test their loyalty to each other and their remorse over what they had done to him, Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers, was reconciled with them, and settled his father and entire family -- 70 souls in all -- in Egypt.
Joseph passed away in Egypt on his 110th birthday. The first of his brothers to die, he transmitted to them the divine promise to Jacob that his children will be taken out of Egypt and restored to their homeland, and made them promise to take his remains with them when they go.
Links:
Joseph and his Brothers
More on Joseph
Daily Quote:
• Rosh Chodesh Observances
Today is the second of the two Rosh Chodesh ("Head of the Month") days for the Hebrew month of "Tammuz" (when a month has 30 days, both the last day of the month and the first day of the following month serve as the following month's Rosh Chodesh).
Special portions are added to the daily prayers: Hallel (Psalms 113-118) is recited -- in its "partial" form -- following the Shacharit morning prayer, and the Yaaleh V'yavo prayer is added to the Amidah and to Grace After Meals; the additional Musaf prayer is said (when Rosh Chodesh is Shabbat, special additions are made to the Shabbat Musaf). Tachnun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted.
Many have the custom to mark Rosh Chodesh with a festive meal and reduced work activity. The latter custom is prevalent amongst women, who have a special affinity with Rosh Chodesh -- the month being the feminine aspect of the Jewish Calendar.
Links: The 29th Day; The Lunar Files
Today in Jewish History:
• Birth and Passing of Joseph (1562 and 1452 BCE)
Joseph, the son of the patriarch Jacob, was born in Charan (Mesopotamia) on the 1st of Tammuz of the year 2199 from creation (1562 BCE), the first child of Jacob's most beloved wife, Rachel, born after 7 childless years of marriage. He passed away on the same date 110 years later, in Egypt.
When Joseph was six years old, Jacob and his family returned to the Holy Land, eventually settling in Hebron. Though younger than 10 of his 11 brothers, he was his father's favorite, and a great rivalry existed between him and his brothers, whose animosity toward him increased when he related two dreams he had forecasting that he is destined to rule over them.
When Joseph was 17, he was sold into slavery by his brothers and taken to Egypt; when he refused the advances of his master's wife, she had him placed in prison, where he languished for 12 years. At age 30, he interpreted a pair of mysterious dreams dreamt by Pharaoh, and was appointed viceroy of Egypt to oversee the gathering and storage of grain in preparation for the seven years of famine that Pharaoh's dreams had predicted. He married Asnat, and had two children, Menasseh and Ephraim.
The great famine brought his brothers to Egypt to purchase grain; after subjecting them to a series of trials to test their loyalty to each other and their remorse over what they had done to him, Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers, was reconciled with them, and settled his father and entire family -- 70 souls in all -- in Egypt.
Joseph passed away in Egypt on his 110th birthday. The first of his brothers to die, he transmitted to them the divine promise to Jacob that his children will be taken out of Egypt and restored to their homeland, and made them promise to take his remains with them when they go.
Links:
Joseph and his Brothers
More on Joseph
Daily Quote:
A person is obligated to say: The entire world was created for my sake[Talmud, Kiddushin 82b]
Daily Torah Study:
Daily Torah Study:
Chumash: Chukat, 1st Portion Numbers 19:1-19:17 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Numbers Chapter 19
1The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying: אוַיְדַבֵּ֣ר יְהֹוָ֔ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה וְאֶל־אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן לֵאמֹֽר:
2This is the statute of the Torah which the Lord commanded, saying, Speak to the children of Israel and have them take for you a perfectly red unblemished cow, upon which no yoke was laid. בזֹ֚את חֻקַּ֣ת הַתּוֹרָ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּ֥ה יְהֹוָ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר דַּבֵּ֣ר | אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְיִקְח֣וּ אֵלֶ֩יךָ֩ פָרָ֨ה אֲדֻמָּ֜ה תְּמִימָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר אֵֽין־בָּהּ֙ מ֔וּם אֲשֶׁ֛ר לֹֽא־עָלָ֥ה עָלֶ֖יהָ עֹֽל:
This is the statute of the Torah: Because Satan and the nations of the world taunt Israel, saying, “ What is this commandment, and what purpose does it have?” Therefore, the Torah uses the term “statute.” I have decreed it; You have no right to challenge it. — [Yoma 67b] זאת חקת התורה: לפי שהשטן ואומות העולם מונין את ישראל לומר מה המצוה הזאת ומה טעם יש בה, לפיכך כתב בה חקה, גזירה היא מלפני ואין לך רשות להרהר אחריה:
and have them take for you: It will always be called on your name; 'the cow which Moses prepared in the desert.’- [Mid. Tanchuma Chukath 8, see Etz Yosef] ויקחו אליך: לעולם היא נקראת על שמך, פרה שעשה משה במדבר:
perfectly red: Heb. אֲדֻמָּה תְּמִימָה, lit., red, perfect. It shall be perfect in redness, so that two black hairs disqualify it. — [Sifrei Chukath 5] אדמה תמימה: שתהא תמימה באדמימות, שאם היו בה שתי שערות שחורות פסולה:
3And you shall give it to Eleazar the kohen, and he shall take it outside the camp and slaughter it in his presence. גוּנְתַתֶּ֣ם אֹתָ֔הּ אֶל־אֶלְעָזָ֖ר הַכֹּהֵ֑ן וְהוֹצִ֤יא אֹתָהּ֙ אֶל־מִח֣וּץ לַמַּֽחֲנֶ֔ה וְשָׁחַ֥ט אֹתָ֖הּ לְפָנָֽיו:
Eleazar: The mitzvah was performed by the deputy [to the kohen gadol]. — [Sifrei Chukath 8] אלעזר: מצותה בסגן:
outside the camp: Outside all three camps. — [Yoma 68a] אל מחוץ למחנה: חוץ לשלש מחנות:
and slaughter it in his presence: A non- kohen slaughters it while Eleazar watches. — [Yoma 42a] ושחט אותה לפניו: זר שוחט ואלעזר רואה:
4Eleazar the kohen shall take from its blood with his finger and sprinkle it toward the front of the Tent of Meeting seven times. דוְלָקַ֞ח אֶלְעָזָ֧ר הַכֹּהֵ֛ן מִדָּמָ֖הּ בְּאֶצְבָּע֑וֹ וְהִזָּ֞ה אֶל־נֹ֨כַח פְּנֵ֧י אֹֽהֶל־מוֹעֵ֛ד מִדָּמָ֖הּ שֶׁ֥בַע פְּעָמִֽים:
toward the front of the Tent of Meeting: [In later generations, when this rite will be performed outside the Temple in Jerusalem,] he is to stand to the east of Jerusalem and to direct his gaze toward the entrance to the Temple while sprinkling the blood. — [Sifrei Chukath 14] אל נוכח פני אהל מועד: עומד במזרחו של ירושלים ומתכוין ורואה פתחו של היכל בשעת הזאה הדם:
5The cow shall then be burned in his presence; its hide, its flesh, its blood, with its dung he shall burn it. הוְשָׂרַ֥ף אֶת־הַפָּרָ֖ה לְעֵינָ֑יו אֶת־עֹרָ֤הּ וְאֶת־בְּשָׂרָהּ֙ וְאֶת־דָּמָ֔הּ עַל־פִּרְשָׁ֖הּ יִשְׂרֹֽף:
6The kohen shall take a piece of cedar wood, hyssop, and crimson wool, and cast them into the burning of the cow. ווְלָקַ֣ח הַכֹּהֵ֗ן עֵ֥ץ אֶ֛רֶז וְאֵז֖וֹב וּשְׁנִ֣י תוֹלָ֑עַת וְהִשְׁלִ֕יךְ אֶל־תּ֖וֹךְ שְׂרֵפַ֥ת הַפָּרָֽה:
7The kohen shall wash his garments and bathe his flesh in water, and then he may enter the camp, and the kohen shall be unclean until evening. זוְכִבֶּ֨ס בְּגָדָ֜יו הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְרָחַ֤ץ בְּשָׂרוֹ֙ בַּמַּ֔יִם וְאַחַ֖ר יָבֹ֣א אֶל־הַמַּֽחֲנֶ֑ה וְטָמֵ֥א הַכֹּהֵ֖ן עַד־הָעָֽרֶב:
enter the camp: The camp of the Divine Presence, because no ritually unclean person is banished from two camps, except one who experienced a flow, one who experienced a seminal emission, or one afflicted with tzara’ath. [Hence, he is admitted to the one camp from which he was banished.] - [Pes. 67a] אל המחנה: למחנה שכינה, שאין טמא משולח חוץ לשתי מחנות אלא זב ובעל קרי ומצורע:
and the kohen shall be unclean until evening: Transpose it [the verse] and explain it [thus]: He shall be unclean until evening, and then he may enter the camp. וטמא הכהן עד הערב: סרסהו ודרשהו וטמא עד הערב ואחר יבוא אל המחנה:
8The one who burns it shall wash his clothes in water and cleanse his body in water, and he shall be unclean until evening. חוְהַשֹּׂרֵ֣ף אֹתָ֔הּ יְכַבֵּ֤ס בְּגָדָיו֙ בַּמַּ֔יִם וְרָחַ֥ץ בְּשָׂר֖וֹ בַּמָּ֑יִם וְטָמֵ֖א עַד־הָעָֽרֶב:
9A ritually clean person shall gather the cow's ashes and place them outside the camp in a clean place, and It shall be as a keepsake for the congregation of the children of Israel for sprinkling water, [used] for cleansing. טוְאָסַ֣ף | אִ֣ישׁ טָה֗וֹר אֵ֚ת אֵ֣פֶר הַפָּרָ֔ה וְהִנִּ֛יחַ מִח֥וּץ לַמַּֽחֲנֶ֖ה בְּמָק֣וֹם טָה֑וֹר וְ֠הָֽיְתָ֠ה לַֽעֲדַ֨ת בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֧ל לְמִשְׁמֶ֛רֶת לְמֵ֥י נִדָּ֖ה חַטָּ֥את הִֽוא:
and place them outside the camp: He divided it into three parts; one was put on the Mount of Olives, one was divided among all the watches, and one who put on the rampart surrounding the Temple area. The one given to the watches was outside the courtyard, allowing access to it for the inhabitants of outlying cities, whoever needed to purify himself. The one on the Mount of Olives was for the kohanim gedolim to sanctify themselves from it for use with other [red] cows. The one put on the rampart was kept as a keepsake by Scriptural ruling, as it says,"It shall be as a keepsake for the congregation of Israel. — [Sifrei Chukath 30, Parah 3:11 Tosefta Parah 3:8] והניח מחוץ למחנה: לשלשה חלקים מחלקה, אחד נתן בהר המשחה, ואחד מתחלק לכל המשמרות, ואחד נתן בחיל. זה של משמרות היה חוץ לעזרה ליטול ממנו בני העיירות וכל הצריכין להטהר, וזה שבהר המשחה כהנים גדולים לפרות אחרות מקדשין הימנו, וזה שבחיל נתון למשמרת מגזרת הכתוב, שנאמר והיתה לעדת בני ישראל למשמרת:
for sprinkling water: Heb. לְמֵי נִדָּה, water used for sprinkling, as in,“they cast (וַיַּדּוּ) a stone at me” (Lam. 3: 53);“to cast down (לְיַדּוֹת) the horns of the nations” (Zech. 2:4); an expression denoting throwing. למי נדה: למי הזייה, כמו (איכה ג, נג) וידו אבן בי, (זכריה ב, ד) לידות את קרנות הגוים, לשון זריקה:
for purification: חַטָּאת, an expression of cleansing (חִטּוּי), according to its simple meaning, but according to its halachoth, Scripture calls it חַטָּאת, “sin-offering,” to tell us that it is like holy objects, and using it for personal benefit is forbidden. — [Sifrei Chukath 34] חטאת הוא: לשון חטוי כפשוטו, ולפי הלכותיו קראה הכתוב חטאת, לומר, שהיא כקדשים להאסר בהנאה:
10The one who gathers the cow's ashes shall wash his clothes, and he shall be unclean until evening. It shall be an everlasting statute for the children of Israel and for the proselyte who resides in their midst. יוְכִבֶּ֠ס הָֽאֹסֵ֨ף אֶת־אֵ֤פֶר הַפָּרָה֙ אֶת־בְּגָדָ֔יו וְטָמֵ֖א עַד־הָעָ֑רֶב וְהָֽיְתָ֞ה לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְלַגֵּ֛ר הַגָּ֥ר בְּתוֹכָ֖ם לְחֻקַּ֥ת עוֹלָֽם:
11Anyone touching the corpse of a human soul shall become unclean for seven days. יאהַנֹּגֵ֥עַ בְּמֵ֖ת לְכָל־נֶ֣פֶשׁ אָדָ֑ם וְטָמֵ֖א שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים:
12On the third and seventh days, he shall cleanse himself with it, so that he can become clean. But if he does not sprinkle himself with it on the third and seventh days, he shall not become clean. יבה֣וּא יִתְחַטָּא־ב֞וֹ בַּיּ֧וֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֛י וּבַיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י יִטְהָ֑ר וְאִם־לֹ֨א יִתְחַטָּ֜א בַּיּ֧וֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֛י וּבַיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י לֹ֥א יִטְהָֽר:
He shall cleanse himself with it: With these ashes. - [Sifrei Chukath 39] הוא יתחטא בו: באפר הזה:
13Whoever touches the corpse of a human soul which dies, and he does not cleanse himself, he has defiled the Mishkan of the Lord, and that soul shall be cut off from Israel. For the sprinkling water was not sprinkled on him, so he remains unclean, and his uncleanness remains upon him. יגכָּל־הַנֹּגֵ֡עַ בְּמֵ֣ת בְּנֶ֩פֶשׁ֩ הָֽאָדָ֨ם אֲשֶׁר־יָמ֜וּת וְלֹ֣א יִתְחַטָּ֗א אֶת־מִשְׁכַּ֤ן יְהֹוָה֙ טִמֵּ֔א וְנִכְרְתָ֛ה הַנֶּ֥פֶשׁ הַהִ֖וא מִיִּשְׂרָאֵ֑ל כִּי֩ מֵ֨י נִדָּ֜ה לֹֽא־זֹרַ֤ק עָלָיו֙ טָמֵ֣א יִֽהְיֶ֔ה ע֖וֹד טֻמְאָת֥וֹ בֽוֹ:
corpse of a human soul: Which type of corpse? That of a human soul, to exclude an animal, that its uncleanness does not require sprinkling. Another explanation:“Of a human soul” refers to a quarter [of a log] of blood [necessary for maintaining life] - [Chul. 72a] במת בנפש: ואי זה מת, של נפש האדם, להוציא נפש בהמה, שאין טומאתה צריכה הזאה. דבר אחר בנפש זו רביעית דם:
he has defiled the Mishkan of the Lord: If he enters the courtyard even after [ritual] immersion, without having been sprinkled on both the third and seventh days. — [Sifrei Chukath 45] את משכן ה' טמא: אם נכנס לעזרה אפילו בטבילה בלא הזאת שלישי ושביעי:
his uncleanness remains: Although he [ritually] immersed himself. - [Sifrei Chukath 45] עוד טמאתו בו: אף על פי שטבל:
14This is the law: if a man dies in a tent, anyone entering the tent and anything in the tent shall be unclean for seven days. ידזֹ֚את הַתּוֹרָ֔ה אָדָ֖ם כִּֽי־יָמ֣וּת בְּאֹ֑הֶל כָּל־הַבָּ֤א אֶל־הָאֹ֨הֶל֙ וְכָל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר בָּאֹ֔הֶל יִטְמָ֖א שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים:
anyone entering the tent: while the corpse is inside. כל הבא אל האהל: בעוד שהמת בתוכו:
15Any open vessel which has no seal fastened around it becomes unclean. טווְכֹל֙ כְּלִ֣י פָת֔וּחַ אֲשֶׁ֛ר אֵֽין־צָמִ֥יד פָּתִ֖יל עָלָ֑יו טָמֵ֖א הֽוּא:
any open vessel: Scripture refers to an earthenware vessel, whose exterior does not accept contamination, only its interior. Thus, if the seal around its top is not securely fastened, it becomes contaminated. But if there is a securely fastened seal, it remains clean. - [Sifrei Chukath 50, Chul. 25a] וכל כלי פתוח: בכלי חרס הכתוב מדבר, שאין מקבל טומאה מגבו אלא מתוכו, לפיכך אם אין מגופת צמידתו פתולה עליו יפה בחבור, טמא הוא, הא אם יש צמיד פתיל עליו טהור:
fastened: Heb. פָּתִיל, an expression meaning “fastened” in Hebrew. Similarly,“[With] divine bonds נִפְתַּלְתּי, I have been joined, with my sister” (Gen. 30:8). פתיל: לשון מחובר בלשון עברי, וכן (בראשית ל, ח) נפתולי א-להים נפתלתי, נתחברתי עם אחותי:
16Anyone who touches one slain by the sword, or a corpse, or a human bone or a grave, in an open field, he shall be unclean for seven days. טזוְכֹ֨ל אֲשֶׁר־יִגַּ֜ע עַל־פְּנֵ֣י הַשָּׂדֶ֗ה בַּֽחֲלַל־חֶ֨רֶב֙ א֣וֹ בְמֵ֔ת אֽוֹ־בְעֶ֥צֶם אָדָ֖ם א֣וֹ בְקָ֑בֶר יִטְמָ֖א שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים:
in an open field: The Sages expounded [on this phrase] to include the top and side of a coffin (Sifrei Chukath 56, Chul. 72a). But the simple meaning is that in an open field, where there is no tent, a corpse contaminates through contact. על פני השדה: רבותינו דרשו לרבות גולל ודופק. ופשוטו על פני השדה, שאין שם אהל, מטמא המת שם בנגיעה:
17They shall take for that unclean person from the ashes of the burnt purification offering, and it shall be placed in a vessel [filled] with spring water. יזוְלָֽקְחוּ֙ לַטָּמֵ֔א מֵֽעֲפַ֖ר שְׂרֵפַ֣ת הַֽחַטָּ֑את וְנָתַ֥ן עָלָ֛יו מַ֥יִם חַיִּ֖ים אֶל־כֶּֽלִי:Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 1 - 9
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 1
This psalm inspires man to study Torah and avoid sin. One who follows this path is assured of success in all his deeds, whereas the plight of the wicked is the reverse.
1. Fortunate is the man that has not walked in the counsel of the wicked, nor stood in the path of sinners, nor sat in the company of scoffers.
2. Rather, his desire is in the Torah of the Lord, and in His Torah he meditates day and night.
3. He shall be like a tree planted by streams of water, that yields its fruit in its season, and whose leaf does not wither; and all that he does shall prosper.
4. Not so the wicked; rather, they are like the chaff that the wind drives away.
5. Therefore the wicked will not endure in judgement, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.
6. For the Lord minds the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.
Chapter 2
This psalm warns against trying to outwit the ways of God. It also instructs one who has reason to rejoice, to tremble—lest his sins cause his joy to be overturned.
1. Why do nations gather, and peoples speak futility?
2. The kings of the earth rise up, and rulers conspire together, against the Lord and against His anointed:
3. “Let us sever their cords, and cast their ropes from upon us!”
4. He Who sits in heaven laughs, my Master mocks them.
5. Then He speaks to them in His anger, and terrifies them in His wrath:
6. “It is I Who have anointed My king, upon Zion, My holy mountain.”
7. I am obliged to declare: The Lord said to me, “You are my son, I have this day begotten you.1
8. Ask of Me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, and the ends of the earth your possession.
9. Smash them with a rod of iron, shatter them like a potter’s vessel.”
10. Now be wise, you kings; be disciplined, you rulers of the earth.
11. Serve the Lord with awe, and rejoice with trembling.
12. Yearn for purity—lest He become angry and your path be doomed, if his anger flares for even a moment. Fortunate are all who put their trust in Him
FOOTNOTES
1.The day David was crowned. (Rashi)
Chapter 3
When punishment befalls man, let him not be upset by his chastisement, for perhaps--considering his sins—he is deserving of worse, and God is in fact dealing kindly with him.
1. A psalm by David, when he fled from Absalom his son.
2. Lord, how numerous are my oppressors; many rise up against me!
3. Many say of my soul, “There is no salvation for him from God—ever!”
4. But You, Lord, are a shield for me, my glory, the One Who raises my head.
5. With my voice I call to the Lord, and He answers me from His holy mountain, Selah.
6. I lie down and sleep; I awake, for the Lord sustains me.
7. I do not fear the myriads of people that have aligned themselves all around me.
8. Arise, O Lord, deliver me, my God. For You struck all my enemies on the cheek, You smashed the teeth of the wicked.
9. Deliverance is the Lord’s; may Your blessing be upon Your people forever
Chapter 4
This psalm exhorts man not to shame his fellow, and to neither speak nor listen to gossip and slander. Envy not the prosperity of the wicked in this world, rather rejoice and say: “If it is so for those who anger Him . . . [how much better it will be for those who serve Him!”]
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music, a psalm by David.
2. Answer me when I call, O God [Who knows] my righteousness. You have relieved me in my distress; be gracious to me and hear my prayer.
3. Sons of men, how long will you turn my honor to shame, will you love vanity, and endlessly seek falsehood?
4. Know that the Lord has set apart His devout one; the Lord will hear when I call to Him.
5. Tremble and do not sin; reflect in your hearts upon your beds, and be silent forever.
6. Offer sacrifices in righteousness, and trust in the Lord.
7. Many say: “Who will show us good?” Raise the light of Your countenance upon us, O Lord.
8. You put joy in my heart, greater than [their joy] when their grain and wine abound.
9. In peace and harmony I will lie down and sleep, for You, Lord, will make me dwell alone, in security.
Chapter 5
A prayer for every individual, requesting that the wicked perish for their deeds, and the righteous rejoice for their good deeds.
1. For the Conductor, on the nechilot,1 a psalm by David.
2. Give ear to my words, O Lord, consider my thoughts.
3. Listen to the voice of my cry, my King and my God, for to You I pray.
4. Lord, hear my voice in the morning; in the morning I set [my prayers] before you and hope.
5. For You are not a God Who desires wickedness; evil does not abide with You.
6. The boastful cannot stand before Your eyes; You hate all evildoers.
7. You destroy the speakers of falsehood; the Lord despises the man of blood and deceit.
8. And I, through Your abundant kindness, come into Your house; I bow toward Your holy Sanctuary, in awe of You.
9. Lead me, O Lord, in Your righteousness, because of my watchful enemies; straighten Your path before me.
10. For there is no sincerity in their mouths, their heart is treacherous; their throat is an open grave, [though] their tongue flatters.
11. Find them guilty, O God, let them fall by their schemes; banish them for their many sins, for they have rebelled against You.
12. But all who trust in You will rejoice, they will sing joyously forever; You will shelter them, and those who love Your Name will exult in You.
13. For You, Lord, will bless the righteous one; You will envelop him with favor as with a shield.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument that sounded like the buzzing of bees (Metzudot).
Chapter 6
This is an awe-inspiring prayer for one who is ill, to pray that God heal him, body and soul. An ailing person who offers this prayer devoutly and with a broken heart is assured that God will accept his prayer.
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music for the eight-stringed harp, a psalm by David.
2. Lord, do not punish me in Your anger, nor chastise me in Your wrath.
3. Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I languish away; heal me, O Lord, for my bones tremble in fear.
4. My soul is panic-stricken; and You, O Lord, how long [before You help]?
5. Relent, O Lord, deliver my soul; save me for the sake of Your kindness.
6. For there is no remembrance of You in death; who will praise You in the grave?
7. I am weary from sighing; each night I drench my bed, I melt my couch with my tears.
8. My eye has grown dim from vexation, worn out by all my oppressors.
9. Depart from me, all you evildoers, for the Lord has heard the sound of my weeping.
10. The Lord has heard my supplication; the Lord accepts my prayer.
11. All my enemies will be shamed and utterly terrified; they will then repent and be shamed for a moment.1
FOOTNOTES
1.Only for a moment will they be shamed, because I will forgive them and never again mention their deeds (Metzudot).
Chapter 7
Do not rejoice if God causes your enemy to suffer—just as the suffering of the righteous is not pleasant. David, therefore, defends himself intensely before God, maintaining that he did not actively harm Saul. In fact, Saul precipitated his own harm, while David’s intentions were only for the good.
1. A shigayon 1 by David, which he sang to the Lord concerning Kush the Benjaminite.
2. I put my trust in You, Lord, my God; deliver me from all my pursuers and save me.
3. Lest he tear my soul like a lion, crushing me with none to rescue.
4. Lord, my God, if I have done this, if there is wrongdoing in my hands;
5. if I have rewarded my friends with evil or oppressed those who hate me without reason—
6. then let the enemy pursue and overtake my soul, let him trample my life to the ground, and lay my glory in the dust forever.
7. Arise, O Lord, in Your anger, lift Yourself up in fury against my foes. Stir me [to mete out] the retribution which You commanded.
8. When the assembly of nations surrounds You, remove Yourself from it and return to the heavens.
9. The Lord will mete out retribution upon the nations; judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness and my integrity.
10. Let the evil of the wicked come to an end, but establish the righteous—O righteous God, Searcher of hearts and minds.
11. [I rely] on God to be my shield, He Who saves the upright of heart.
12. God is the righteous judge, and the Almighty is angered every day.
13. Because he does not repent, He sharpens His sword, bends His bow and makes it ready.
14. He has prepared instruments of death for him; His arrows will be used on the pursuers.
15. Indeed, he conceives iniquity, is pregnant with evil schemes, and gives birth to falsehood.
16. He digs a pit, digs it deep, only to fall into the trap he laid.
17. His mischief will return upon his own head, his violence will come down upon his own skull.
18. I will praise the Lord according to His righteousness, and sing to the Name of the Lord Most High
FOOTNOTES
1.This refers either to a musical instrument, or to a mistake committed by David, in recognition of which this psalm was written (Rashi).
Chapter 8
This psalm is a glorious praise to God for His kindness to the lowly and mortal human in giving the Torah to the inhabitants of the lower worlds, arousing the envy of the celestial angels. This idea is expressed in the Yom Kippur prayer, “Though Your mighty strength is in the angels above, You desire praise from those formed of lowly matter.”
1. For the Conductor, on the gittit,1 a psalm by David.
2. Lord, our Master, how mighty is Your Name throughout the earth, You Who has set Your majesty upon the heavens!
3. Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings You have established might, to counter Your enemies, to silence foe and avenger.2
4. When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have set in place—
5. what is man that You should remember him, son of man that You should be mindful of him?
6. Yet, You have made him but a little less than the angels, and crowned him with honor and glory.
7. You made him ruler over Your handiwork, You placed everything under his feet.
8. Sheep and cattle—all of them, also the beasts of the field;
9. the birds of the sky and the fish of the sea; all that traverses the paths of the seas.
10. Lord, our Master, how mighty is Your Name throughout the earth.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument crafted in Gath (Metzudot).
2.The wonders of childbirth and nursing demonstrate God’s existence to non-believers (Metzudot).
Chapter 9
One should praise God for saving him from the hand of the enemy who stands over and agonizes him, and for His judging each person according to his deeds: the righteous according to their righteousness, and the wicked according to their wickedness.
1. For the Conductor, upon the death of Labben, a psalm by David.
2. I will thank the Lord with all my heart; I will recount all Your wonders.
3. I will rejoice and exult in You; I will sing to Your Name, O Most High.
4. When my enemies retreat, they will stumble and perish from before You.
5. You have rendered my judgement and [defended] my cause; You sat on the throne, O righteous Judge.
6. You destroyed nations, doomed the wicked, erased their name for all eternity.
7. O enemy, your ruins are gone forever, and the cities you have uprooted—their very remembrance is lost.
8. But the Lord is enthroned forever, He established His throne for judgement.
9. And He will judge the world with justice, He will render judgement to the nations with righteousness.
10. The Lord will be a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble.
11. Those who know Your Name put their trust in You, for You, Lord, have not abandoned those who seek You.
12. Sing to the Lord Who dwells in Zion, recount His deeds among the nations.
13. For the Avenger of bloodshed is mindful of them; He does not forget the cry of the downtrodden.
14. Be gracious to me, O Lord; behold my affliction at the hands of my enemies, You Who raises me from the gates of death,
15. so that I may relate all Your praises in the gates of the daughter of Zion, that I may exult in Your deliverance.
16. The nations sank into the pit that they made; in the net they concealed their foot was caught.
17. The Lord became known through the judgement He executed; the wicked one is snared in the work of his own hands; reflect on this always.
18. The wicked will return to the grave, all the nations that forget God.
19. For not for eternity will the needy be forgotten, nor will the hope of the poor perish forever.
20. Arise, O Lord, let not man prevail; let the nations be judged in Your presence.
21. Set Your mastery over them, O Lord; let the nations know that they are but frail men, Selah.
Tanya: Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, beginning of Chapter 10
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Sunday, Tammuz 1, 5777 · June 25, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, beginning of Chapter 10
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Sunday, Tammuz 1, 5777 · June 25, 2017
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Positive Commandment 241
Damage Caused by Arson
"If a fire breaks out and spreads through thorns..."—Exodus 22:5.
We are commanded regarding the laws [of liability] that apply if a person sets a fire [that damages another's property].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Numbers Chapter 19
1The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying: אוַיְדַבֵּ֣ר יְהֹוָ֔ה אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה וְאֶל־אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן לֵאמֹֽר:
2This is the statute of the Torah which the Lord commanded, saying, Speak to the children of Israel and have them take for you a perfectly red unblemished cow, upon which no yoke was laid. בזֹ֚את חֻקַּ֣ת הַתּוֹרָ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּ֥ה יְהֹוָ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר דַּבֵּ֣ר | אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְיִקְח֣וּ אֵלֶ֩יךָ֩ פָרָ֨ה אֲדֻמָּ֜ה תְּמִימָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר אֵֽין־בָּהּ֙ מ֔וּם אֲשֶׁ֛ר לֹֽא־עָלָ֥ה עָלֶ֖יהָ עֹֽל:
This is the statute of the Torah: Because Satan and the nations of the world taunt Israel, saying, “ What is this commandment, and what purpose does it have?” Therefore, the Torah uses the term “statute.” I have decreed it; You have no right to challenge it. — [Yoma 67b] זאת חקת התורה: לפי שהשטן ואומות העולם מונין את ישראל לומר מה המצוה הזאת ומה טעם יש בה, לפיכך כתב בה חקה, גזירה היא מלפני ואין לך רשות להרהר אחריה:
and have them take for you: It will always be called on your name; 'the cow which Moses prepared in the desert.’- [Mid. Tanchuma Chukath 8, see Etz Yosef] ויקחו אליך: לעולם היא נקראת על שמך, פרה שעשה משה במדבר:
perfectly red: Heb. אֲדֻמָּה תְּמִימָה, lit., red, perfect. It shall be perfect in redness, so that two black hairs disqualify it. — [Sifrei Chukath 5] אדמה תמימה: שתהא תמימה באדמימות, שאם היו בה שתי שערות שחורות פסולה:
3And you shall give it to Eleazar the kohen, and he shall take it outside the camp and slaughter it in his presence. גוּנְתַתֶּ֣ם אֹתָ֔הּ אֶל־אֶלְעָזָ֖ר הַכֹּהֵ֑ן וְהוֹצִ֤יא אֹתָהּ֙ אֶל־מִח֣וּץ לַמַּֽחֲנֶ֔ה וְשָׁחַ֥ט אֹתָ֖הּ לְפָנָֽיו:
Eleazar: The mitzvah was performed by the deputy [to the kohen gadol]. — [Sifrei Chukath 8] אלעזר: מצותה בסגן:
outside the camp: Outside all three camps. — [Yoma 68a] אל מחוץ למחנה: חוץ לשלש מחנות:
and slaughter it in his presence: A non- kohen slaughters it while Eleazar watches. — [Yoma 42a] ושחט אותה לפניו: זר שוחט ואלעזר רואה:
4Eleazar the kohen shall take from its blood with his finger and sprinkle it toward the front of the Tent of Meeting seven times. דוְלָקַ֞ח אֶלְעָזָ֧ר הַכֹּהֵ֛ן מִדָּמָ֖הּ בְּאֶצְבָּע֑וֹ וְהִזָּ֞ה אֶל־נֹ֨כַח פְּנֵ֧י אֹֽהֶל־מוֹעֵ֛ד מִדָּמָ֖הּ שֶׁ֥בַע פְּעָמִֽים:
toward the front of the Tent of Meeting: [In later generations, when this rite will be performed outside the Temple in Jerusalem,] he is to stand to the east of Jerusalem and to direct his gaze toward the entrance to the Temple while sprinkling the blood. — [Sifrei Chukath 14] אל נוכח פני אהל מועד: עומד במזרחו של ירושלים ומתכוין ורואה פתחו של היכל בשעת הזאה הדם:
5The cow shall then be burned in his presence; its hide, its flesh, its blood, with its dung he shall burn it. הוְשָׂרַ֥ף אֶת־הַפָּרָ֖ה לְעֵינָ֑יו אֶת־עֹרָ֤הּ וְאֶת־בְּשָׂרָהּ֙ וְאֶת־דָּמָ֔הּ עַל־פִּרְשָׁ֖הּ יִשְׂרֹֽף:
6The kohen shall take a piece of cedar wood, hyssop, and crimson wool, and cast them into the burning of the cow. ווְלָקַ֣ח הַכֹּהֵ֗ן עֵ֥ץ אֶ֛רֶז וְאֵז֖וֹב וּשְׁנִ֣י תוֹלָ֑עַת וְהִשְׁלִ֕יךְ אֶל־תּ֖וֹךְ שְׂרֵפַ֥ת הַפָּרָֽה:
7The kohen shall wash his garments and bathe his flesh in water, and then he may enter the camp, and the kohen shall be unclean until evening. זוְכִבֶּ֨ס בְּגָדָ֜יו הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְרָחַ֤ץ בְּשָׂרוֹ֙ בַּמַּ֔יִם וְאַחַ֖ר יָבֹ֣א אֶל־הַמַּֽחֲנֶ֑ה וְטָמֵ֥א הַכֹּהֵ֖ן עַד־הָעָֽרֶב:
enter the camp: The camp of the Divine Presence, because no ritually unclean person is banished from two camps, except one who experienced a flow, one who experienced a seminal emission, or one afflicted with tzara’ath. [Hence, he is admitted to the one camp from which he was banished.] - [Pes. 67a] אל המחנה: למחנה שכינה, שאין טמא משולח חוץ לשתי מחנות אלא זב ובעל קרי ומצורע:
and the kohen shall be unclean until evening: Transpose it [the verse] and explain it [thus]: He shall be unclean until evening, and then he may enter the camp. וטמא הכהן עד הערב: סרסהו ודרשהו וטמא עד הערב ואחר יבוא אל המחנה:
8The one who burns it shall wash his clothes in water and cleanse his body in water, and he shall be unclean until evening. חוְהַשֹּׂרֵ֣ף אֹתָ֔הּ יְכַבֵּ֤ס בְּגָדָיו֙ בַּמַּ֔יִם וְרָחַ֥ץ בְּשָׂר֖וֹ בַּמָּ֑יִם וְטָמֵ֖א עַד־הָעָֽרֶב:
9A ritually clean person shall gather the cow's ashes and place them outside the camp in a clean place, and It shall be as a keepsake for the congregation of the children of Israel for sprinkling water, [used] for cleansing. טוְאָסַ֣ף | אִ֣ישׁ טָה֗וֹר אֵ֚ת אֵ֣פֶר הַפָּרָ֔ה וְהִנִּ֛יחַ מִח֥וּץ לַמַּֽחֲנֶ֖ה בְּמָק֣וֹם טָה֑וֹר וְ֠הָֽיְתָ֠ה לַֽעֲדַ֨ת בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֧ל לְמִשְׁמֶ֛רֶת לְמֵ֥י נִדָּ֖ה חַטָּ֥את הִֽוא:
and place them outside the camp: He divided it into three parts; one was put on the Mount of Olives, one was divided among all the watches, and one who put on the rampart surrounding the Temple area. The one given to the watches was outside the courtyard, allowing access to it for the inhabitants of outlying cities, whoever needed to purify himself. The one on the Mount of Olives was for the kohanim gedolim to sanctify themselves from it for use with other [red] cows. The one put on the rampart was kept as a keepsake by Scriptural ruling, as it says,"It shall be as a keepsake for the congregation of Israel. — [Sifrei Chukath 30, Parah 3:11 Tosefta Parah 3:8] והניח מחוץ למחנה: לשלשה חלקים מחלקה, אחד נתן בהר המשחה, ואחד מתחלק לכל המשמרות, ואחד נתן בחיל. זה של משמרות היה חוץ לעזרה ליטול ממנו בני העיירות וכל הצריכין להטהר, וזה שבהר המשחה כהנים גדולים לפרות אחרות מקדשין הימנו, וזה שבחיל נתון למשמרת מגזרת הכתוב, שנאמר והיתה לעדת בני ישראל למשמרת:
for sprinkling water: Heb. לְמֵי נִדָּה, water used for sprinkling, as in,“they cast (וַיַּדּוּ) a stone at me” (Lam. 3: 53);“to cast down (לְיַדּוֹת) the horns of the nations” (Zech. 2:4); an expression denoting throwing. למי נדה: למי הזייה, כמו (איכה ג, נג) וידו אבן בי, (זכריה ב, ד) לידות את קרנות הגוים, לשון זריקה:
for purification: חַטָּאת, an expression of cleansing (חִטּוּי), according to its simple meaning, but according to its halachoth, Scripture calls it חַטָּאת, “sin-offering,” to tell us that it is like holy objects, and using it for personal benefit is forbidden. — [Sifrei Chukath 34] חטאת הוא: לשון חטוי כפשוטו, ולפי הלכותיו קראה הכתוב חטאת, לומר, שהיא כקדשים להאסר בהנאה:
10The one who gathers the cow's ashes shall wash his clothes, and he shall be unclean until evening. It shall be an everlasting statute for the children of Israel and for the proselyte who resides in their midst. יוְכִבֶּ֠ס הָֽאֹסֵ֨ף אֶת־אֵ֤פֶר הַפָּרָה֙ אֶת־בְּגָדָ֔יו וְטָמֵ֖א עַד־הָעָ֑רֶב וְהָֽיְתָ֞ה לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְלַגֵּ֛ר הַגָּ֥ר בְּתוֹכָ֖ם לְחֻקַּ֥ת עוֹלָֽם:
11Anyone touching the corpse of a human soul shall become unclean for seven days. יאהַנֹּגֵ֥עַ בְּמֵ֖ת לְכָל־נֶ֣פֶשׁ אָדָ֑ם וְטָמֵ֖א שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים:
12On the third and seventh days, he shall cleanse himself with it, so that he can become clean. But if he does not sprinkle himself with it on the third and seventh days, he shall not become clean. יבה֣וּא יִתְחַטָּא־ב֞וֹ בַּיּ֧וֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֛י וּבַיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י יִטְהָ֑ר וְאִם־לֹ֨א יִתְחַטָּ֜א בַּיּ֧וֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֛י וּבַיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י לֹ֥א יִטְהָֽר:
He shall cleanse himself with it: With these ashes. - [Sifrei Chukath 39] הוא יתחטא בו: באפר הזה:
13Whoever touches the corpse of a human soul which dies, and he does not cleanse himself, he has defiled the Mishkan of the Lord, and that soul shall be cut off from Israel. For the sprinkling water was not sprinkled on him, so he remains unclean, and his uncleanness remains upon him. יגכָּל־הַנֹּגֵ֡עַ בְּמֵ֣ת בְּנֶ֩פֶשׁ֩ הָֽאָדָ֨ם אֲשֶׁר־יָמ֜וּת וְלֹ֣א יִתְחַטָּ֗א אֶת־מִשְׁכַּ֤ן יְהֹוָה֙ טִמֵּ֔א וְנִכְרְתָ֛ה הַנֶּ֥פֶשׁ הַהִ֖וא מִיִּשְׂרָאֵ֑ל כִּי֩ מֵ֨י נִדָּ֜ה לֹֽא־זֹרַ֤ק עָלָיו֙ טָמֵ֣א יִֽהְיֶ֔ה ע֖וֹד טֻמְאָת֥וֹ בֽוֹ:
corpse of a human soul: Which type of corpse? That of a human soul, to exclude an animal, that its uncleanness does not require sprinkling. Another explanation:“Of a human soul” refers to a quarter [of a log] of blood [necessary for maintaining life] - [Chul. 72a] במת בנפש: ואי זה מת, של נפש האדם, להוציא נפש בהמה, שאין טומאתה צריכה הזאה. דבר אחר בנפש זו רביעית דם:
he has defiled the Mishkan of the Lord: If he enters the courtyard even after [ritual] immersion, without having been sprinkled on both the third and seventh days. — [Sifrei Chukath 45] את משכן ה' טמא: אם נכנס לעזרה אפילו בטבילה בלא הזאת שלישי ושביעי:
his uncleanness remains: Although he [ritually] immersed himself. - [Sifrei Chukath 45] עוד טמאתו בו: אף על פי שטבל:
14This is the law: if a man dies in a tent, anyone entering the tent and anything in the tent shall be unclean for seven days. ידזֹ֚את הַתּוֹרָ֔ה אָדָ֖ם כִּֽי־יָמ֣וּת בְּאֹ֑הֶל כָּל־הַבָּ֤א אֶל־הָאֹ֨הֶל֙ וְכָל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר בָּאֹ֔הֶל יִטְמָ֖א שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים:
anyone entering the tent: while the corpse is inside. כל הבא אל האהל: בעוד שהמת בתוכו:
15Any open vessel which has no seal fastened around it becomes unclean. טווְכֹל֙ כְּלִ֣י פָת֔וּחַ אֲשֶׁ֛ר אֵֽין־צָמִ֥יד פָּתִ֖יל עָלָ֑יו טָמֵ֖א הֽוּא:
any open vessel: Scripture refers to an earthenware vessel, whose exterior does not accept contamination, only its interior. Thus, if the seal around its top is not securely fastened, it becomes contaminated. But if there is a securely fastened seal, it remains clean. - [Sifrei Chukath 50, Chul. 25a] וכל כלי פתוח: בכלי חרס הכתוב מדבר, שאין מקבל טומאה מגבו אלא מתוכו, לפיכך אם אין מגופת צמידתו פתולה עליו יפה בחבור, טמא הוא, הא אם יש צמיד פתיל עליו טהור:
fastened: Heb. פָּתִיל, an expression meaning “fastened” in Hebrew. Similarly,“[With] divine bonds נִפְתַּלְתּי, I have been joined, with my sister” (Gen. 30:8). פתיל: לשון מחובר בלשון עברי, וכן (בראשית ל, ח) נפתולי א-להים נפתלתי, נתחברתי עם אחותי:
16Anyone who touches one slain by the sword, or a corpse, or a human bone or a grave, in an open field, he shall be unclean for seven days. טזוְכֹ֨ל אֲשֶׁר־יִגַּ֜ע עַל־פְּנֵ֣י הַשָּׂדֶ֗ה בַּֽחֲלַל־חֶ֨רֶב֙ א֣וֹ בְמֵ֔ת אֽוֹ־בְעֶ֥צֶם אָדָ֖ם א֣וֹ בְקָ֑בֶר יִטְמָ֖א שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים:
in an open field: The Sages expounded [on this phrase] to include the top and side of a coffin (Sifrei Chukath 56, Chul. 72a). But the simple meaning is that in an open field, where there is no tent, a corpse contaminates through contact. על פני השדה: רבותינו דרשו לרבות גולל ודופק. ופשוטו על פני השדה, שאין שם אהל, מטמא המת שם בנגיעה:
17They shall take for that unclean person from the ashes of the burnt purification offering, and it shall be placed in a vessel [filled] with spring water. יזוְלָֽקְחוּ֙ לַטָּמֵ֔א מֵֽעֲפַ֖ר שְׂרֵפַ֣ת הַֽחַטָּ֑את וְנָתַ֥ן עָלָ֛יו מַ֥יִם חַיִּ֖ים אֶל־כֶּֽלִי:Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 1 - 9
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 1
This psalm inspires man to study Torah and avoid sin. One who follows this path is assured of success in all his deeds, whereas the plight of the wicked is the reverse.
1. Fortunate is the man that has not walked in the counsel of the wicked, nor stood in the path of sinners, nor sat in the company of scoffers.
2. Rather, his desire is in the Torah of the Lord, and in His Torah he meditates day and night.
3. He shall be like a tree planted by streams of water, that yields its fruit in its season, and whose leaf does not wither; and all that he does shall prosper.
4. Not so the wicked; rather, they are like the chaff that the wind drives away.
5. Therefore the wicked will not endure in judgement, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.
6. For the Lord minds the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.
Chapter 2
This psalm warns against trying to outwit the ways of God. It also instructs one who has reason to rejoice, to tremble—lest his sins cause his joy to be overturned.
1. Why do nations gather, and peoples speak futility?
2. The kings of the earth rise up, and rulers conspire together, against the Lord and against His anointed:
3. “Let us sever their cords, and cast their ropes from upon us!”
4. He Who sits in heaven laughs, my Master mocks them.
5. Then He speaks to them in His anger, and terrifies them in His wrath:
6. “It is I Who have anointed My king, upon Zion, My holy mountain.”
7. I am obliged to declare: The Lord said to me, “You are my son, I have this day begotten you.1
8. Ask of Me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, and the ends of the earth your possession.
9. Smash them with a rod of iron, shatter them like a potter’s vessel.”
10. Now be wise, you kings; be disciplined, you rulers of the earth.
11. Serve the Lord with awe, and rejoice with trembling.
12. Yearn for purity—lest He become angry and your path be doomed, if his anger flares for even a moment. Fortunate are all who put their trust in Him
FOOTNOTES
1.The day David was crowned. (Rashi)
Chapter 3
When punishment befalls man, let him not be upset by his chastisement, for perhaps--considering his sins—he is deserving of worse, and God is in fact dealing kindly with him.
1. A psalm by David, when he fled from Absalom his son.
2. Lord, how numerous are my oppressors; many rise up against me!
3. Many say of my soul, “There is no salvation for him from God—ever!”
4. But You, Lord, are a shield for me, my glory, the One Who raises my head.
5. With my voice I call to the Lord, and He answers me from His holy mountain, Selah.
6. I lie down and sleep; I awake, for the Lord sustains me.
7. I do not fear the myriads of people that have aligned themselves all around me.
8. Arise, O Lord, deliver me, my God. For You struck all my enemies on the cheek, You smashed the teeth of the wicked.
9. Deliverance is the Lord’s; may Your blessing be upon Your people forever
Chapter 4
This psalm exhorts man not to shame his fellow, and to neither speak nor listen to gossip and slander. Envy not the prosperity of the wicked in this world, rather rejoice and say: “If it is so for those who anger Him . . . [how much better it will be for those who serve Him!”]
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music, a psalm by David.
2. Answer me when I call, O God [Who knows] my righteousness. You have relieved me in my distress; be gracious to me and hear my prayer.
3. Sons of men, how long will you turn my honor to shame, will you love vanity, and endlessly seek falsehood?
4. Know that the Lord has set apart His devout one; the Lord will hear when I call to Him.
5. Tremble and do not sin; reflect in your hearts upon your beds, and be silent forever.
6. Offer sacrifices in righteousness, and trust in the Lord.
7. Many say: “Who will show us good?” Raise the light of Your countenance upon us, O Lord.
8. You put joy in my heart, greater than [their joy] when their grain and wine abound.
9. In peace and harmony I will lie down and sleep, for You, Lord, will make me dwell alone, in security.
Chapter 5
A prayer for every individual, requesting that the wicked perish for their deeds, and the righteous rejoice for their good deeds.
1. For the Conductor, on the nechilot,1 a psalm by David.
2. Give ear to my words, O Lord, consider my thoughts.
3. Listen to the voice of my cry, my King and my God, for to You I pray.
4. Lord, hear my voice in the morning; in the morning I set [my prayers] before you and hope.
5. For You are not a God Who desires wickedness; evil does not abide with You.
6. The boastful cannot stand before Your eyes; You hate all evildoers.
7. You destroy the speakers of falsehood; the Lord despises the man of blood and deceit.
8. And I, through Your abundant kindness, come into Your house; I bow toward Your holy Sanctuary, in awe of You.
9. Lead me, O Lord, in Your righteousness, because of my watchful enemies; straighten Your path before me.
10. For there is no sincerity in their mouths, their heart is treacherous; their throat is an open grave, [though] their tongue flatters.
11. Find them guilty, O God, let them fall by their schemes; banish them for their many sins, for they have rebelled against You.
12. But all who trust in You will rejoice, they will sing joyously forever; You will shelter them, and those who love Your Name will exult in You.
13. For You, Lord, will bless the righteous one; You will envelop him with favor as with a shield.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument that sounded like the buzzing of bees (Metzudot).
Chapter 6
This is an awe-inspiring prayer for one who is ill, to pray that God heal him, body and soul. An ailing person who offers this prayer devoutly and with a broken heart is assured that God will accept his prayer.
1. For the Conductor, with instrumental music for the eight-stringed harp, a psalm by David.
2. Lord, do not punish me in Your anger, nor chastise me in Your wrath.
3. Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I languish away; heal me, O Lord, for my bones tremble in fear.
4. My soul is panic-stricken; and You, O Lord, how long [before You help]?
5. Relent, O Lord, deliver my soul; save me for the sake of Your kindness.
6. For there is no remembrance of You in death; who will praise You in the grave?
7. I am weary from sighing; each night I drench my bed, I melt my couch with my tears.
8. My eye has grown dim from vexation, worn out by all my oppressors.
9. Depart from me, all you evildoers, for the Lord has heard the sound of my weeping.
10. The Lord has heard my supplication; the Lord accepts my prayer.
11. All my enemies will be shamed and utterly terrified; they will then repent and be shamed for a moment.1
FOOTNOTES
1.Only for a moment will they be shamed, because I will forgive them and never again mention their deeds (Metzudot).
Chapter 7
Do not rejoice if God causes your enemy to suffer—just as the suffering of the righteous is not pleasant. David, therefore, defends himself intensely before God, maintaining that he did not actively harm Saul. In fact, Saul precipitated his own harm, while David’s intentions were only for the good.
1. A shigayon 1 by David, which he sang to the Lord concerning Kush the Benjaminite.
2. I put my trust in You, Lord, my God; deliver me from all my pursuers and save me.
3. Lest he tear my soul like a lion, crushing me with none to rescue.
4. Lord, my God, if I have done this, if there is wrongdoing in my hands;
5. if I have rewarded my friends with evil or oppressed those who hate me without reason—
6. then let the enemy pursue and overtake my soul, let him trample my life to the ground, and lay my glory in the dust forever.
7. Arise, O Lord, in Your anger, lift Yourself up in fury against my foes. Stir me [to mete out] the retribution which You commanded.
8. When the assembly of nations surrounds You, remove Yourself from it and return to the heavens.
9. The Lord will mete out retribution upon the nations; judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness and my integrity.
10. Let the evil of the wicked come to an end, but establish the righteous—O righteous God, Searcher of hearts and minds.
11. [I rely] on God to be my shield, He Who saves the upright of heart.
12. God is the righteous judge, and the Almighty is angered every day.
13. Because he does not repent, He sharpens His sword, bends His bow and makes it ready.
14. He has prepared instruments of death for him; His arrows will be used on the pursuers.
15. Indeed, he conceives iniquity, is pregnant with evil schemes, and gives birth to falsehood.
16. He digs a pit, digs it deep, only to fall into the trap he laid.
17. His mischief will return upon his own head, his violence will come down upon his own skull.
18. I will praise the Lord according to His righteousness, and sing to the Name of the Lord Most High
FOOTNOTES
1.This refers either to a musical instrument, or to a mistake committed by David, in recognition of which this psalm was written (Rashi).
Chapter 8
This psalm is a glorious praise to God for His kindness to the lowly and mortal human in giving the Torah to the inhabitants of the lower worlds, arousing the envy of the celestial angels. This idea is expressed in the Yom Kippur prayer, “Though Your mighty strength is in the angels above, You desire praise from those formed of lowly matter.”
1. For the Conductor, on the gittit,1 a psalm by David.
2. Lord, our Master, how mighty is Your Name throughout the earth, You Who has set Your majesty upon the heavens!
3. Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings You have established might, to counter Your enemies, to silence foe and avenger.2
4. When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have set in place—
5. what is man that You should remember him, son of man that You should be mindful of him?
6. Yet, You have made him but a little less than the angels, and crowned him with honor and glory.
7. You made him ruler over Your handiwork, You placed everything under his feet.
8. Sheep and cattle—all of them, also the beasts of the field;
9. the birds of the sky and the fish of the sea; all that traverses the paths of the seas.
10. Lord, our Master, how mighty is Your Name throughout the earth.
FOOTNOTES
1.A musical instrument crafted in Gath (Metzudot).
2.The wonders of childbirth and nursing demonstrate God’s existence to non-believers (Metzudot).
Chapter 9
One should praise God for saving him from the hand of the enemy who stands over and agonizes him, and for His judging each person according to his deeds: the righteous according to their righteousness, and the wicked according to their wickedness.
1. For the Conductor, upon the death of Labben, a psalm by David.
2. I will thank the Lord with all my heart; I will recount all Your wonders.
3. I will rejoice and exult in You; I will sing to Your Name, O Most High.
4. When my enemies retreat, they will stumble and perish from before You.
5. You have rendered my judgement and [defended] my cause; You sat on the throne, O righteous Judge.
6. You destroyed nations, doomed the wicked, erased their name for all eternity.
7. O enemy, your ruins are gone forever, and the cities you have uprooted—their very remembrance is lost.
8. But the Lord is enthroned forever, He established His throne for judgement.
9. And He will judge the world with justice, He will render judgement to the nations with righteousness.
10. The Lord will be a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble.
11. Those who know Your Name put their trust in You, for You, Lord, have not abandoned those who seek You.
12. Sing to the Lord Who dwells in Zion, recount His deeds among the nations.
13. For the Avenger of bloodshed is mindful of them; He does not forget the cry of the downtrodden.
14. Be gracious to me, O Lord; behold my affliction at the hands of my enemies, You Who raises me from the gates of death,
15. so that I may relate all Your praises in the gates of the daughter of Zion, that I may exult in Your deliverance.
16. The nations sank into the pit that they made; in the net they concealed their foot was caught.
17. The Lord became known through the judgement He executed; the wicked one is snared in the work of his own hands; reflect on this always.
18. The wicked will return to the grave, all the nations that forget God.
19. For not for eternity will the needy be forgotten, nor will the hope of the poor perish forever.
20. Arise, O Lord, let not man prevail; let the nations be judged in Your presence.
21. Set Your mastery over them, O Lord; let the nations know that they are but frail men, Selah.
Tanya: Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, beginning of Chapter 10
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Sunday, Tammuz 1, 5777 · June 25, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, beginning of Chapter 10
Concluding the previous chapter, the Alter Rebbe explained that since G‑d is infinitely exalted above intellect, intellectual means are inadequate to grasp His absolute union with the Sefirot of the World of Atzilut. These are limited to the particular Divine attributes of wisdom, kindness, and so on. The Zohar thus terms these attributes “the secret of faith,” for their union with the Divine beggars mortal comprehension.
אך בכל מקום
Nevertheless, despite the fact that the Sefirot transcend intellect and comprehension,
הואיל ודברה תורה כלשון בני אדם, לשכך את האוזן מה שהיא יכולה לשמוע
since1 “the Torah speaks as in the language of man” in order to2 “modulate for the ear what it is able to hear,”
לכך ניתן רשות לחכמי האמת לדבר בספירות בדרך משל
permission has been granted to the Kabbalists (lit., “the scholars of truth”) to speak allegorically of the Sefirot.
Note of the Rebbe: “The use of the term משל (‘allegory’) stresses that the allegory and its object are not identical, but merely that there is a similarity between the relationship that subsists among the particulars of the analogy to the relationship that subsists among the particulars of the analogue. There is, however, no connection at all between the particular aspects of the analogy and the analogue.
“Here, for instance: the sun’s rays and the sun do not compare in any way at all to the Sefirot and their Source. The analogy refers only to the manner in which the sun’s rays are united (i.e., related) with the sun itself. This analogy makes it easier for us to comprehend the unity of the Sefirot with their Source.”
וקראו אותן אורות
[The Kabbalists] called [the Sefirot] “lights”, using terminology borrowed from the revelation of light,
כדי שעל ידי המשל הזה, יובן לנו קצת ענין היחוד של הקב״ה ומדותיו
so that by means of this metaphor, the nature of the unity of the Holy One, blessed be He, and His attributes, will be somewhat understood by us.
שהוא, בדרך משל, כעין יחוד אור השמש שבתוך גוף כדור השמש, עם גוף השמש שנקרא מאור
It is, by way of illustration, like the unity of the sunlight that is within the solar globe, with the solar globe [itself], which is called not only “sun” but also a “luminary,” inasmuch as it emits light,
כמו שכתוב: את המאור הגדול וגו׳
as it is written,3 that G‑d created “the greater luminary...,” i.e., the very source of light.
והזיו והניצו׳ המתפשט ומאיר ממנו נקרא אור, כמו שכתוב: ויקרא אלקים לאור יום
The radiation and the beam which spreads forth and shines from it is called “light”, as it is written,4 “And G‑d called the light — day.”
וכשהאור הוא במקורו, בגוף השמש, הוא מיוחד עמו בתכלית היחוד
When the light is within its source in the orb of the sun, it is united with it in absolute unity,
כי אין שם רק עצם אחד, שהוא גוף המאור המאיר
for there, within the sun, there is only one entity, namely, the body of the luminary which emits light;
It would hardly be reasonable to say that within the orb of the sun there exist two things: the luminary and its light. Within the sun globe, only the sun itself exists.
כי הזיו והאור שם עצם אחד ממש עם גוף המאור המאיר, ואין לו שום מציאות כלל בפני עצמו
for there the radiation and light is absolutely one being with the body of the luminary which illuminates, and it has no existence by itself at all.
The appearance of radiation and light outside the sun would seem to indicate that light exists within the sun itself, for if it reaches out and illuminates the whole world it is surely found within its source. In fact, however, when sunlight is considered at the stage at which it is found within the luminary itself, it is so completely identified with it that it cannot be termed light at all; within the sun, the light has no existence with an independent identity.5
וכדברים האלה ממש ויותר מזה, הן מדותיו של הקב״ה ורצונו וחכמתו בעולם האצילות, עם מהותו ועצמותו, כביכול
Precisely in this manner, and even more so, is [the unity of] (on the one hand) the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He, and His Will and wisdom in the World of Atzilut, with (on the other hand) His Essence and Being, as it were,
המתלבש בתוכם ומתייחד עמהם בתכלית היחוד
Who becomes clothed in them — in the Sefirot of Atzilut — and unites with them in perfect unity,
מאחר שנמשכו ונאצלו מאתו יתברך, על דרך משל, כדרך התפשטות האורמהשמש
since they derived and emanated from Him just as (by way of analogy) light is diffused from the sun.
אך לא ממש בדרך זה, רק בדרך רחוקה ונפלאה מהשגתינו, כי גבהו דרכיו מדרכינו
However, [G‑d’s unity with His attributes] is not exactly in this manner, i.e., like the fusion of the sun with the light which is still within it, but in a manner which is remote and concealed from our comprehension, for6 His ways are higher than our ways.
ומכל מקום, לשכך האוזן
Nevertheless, despite its superior manner of unity, since one must “modulate for the ear [what it is able to hear],”
נשמע ונתבונן ממשל אור השמש המיוחד ובטל במקורו, ואינו עולה בשם בפני עצמו, רק שם המקור לבדו
we can perceive and comprehend that just as in the analogy, the light of the sun which is united with and nullified in its source has no name of its own, only the name of its source,
כך כל מדותיו של הקב״ה ורצונו וחכמתו אינן עולות ונקראות בשמות אלו כלל
so too, all the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He, and His Will and wisdom, are not designated and called by these names at all, relative to Him,
אלא לגבי הנבראים, עליונים ותחתונים
but only in relation to the creatures which are (Note of the Rebbe:) “below the World of Atzilut, i.e., inBeriah, Yetzirah and Asiyah, these [creatures] being” [both] higher and lower,
שהווייתם וחיותם והנהגתם, שהקב״ה מהוה ומחיה אותם ומנהיגם
which are brought into existence and given life and guided in their conduct by the Holy One, blessed be He,
הוא ברצונו וחכמתו ובינתו ודעתו, המתלבשות במדותיו הקדושות
through His Will and wisdom and understanding and knowledge, which garb themselves in His holy emotive attributes, such as Chesed, Gevurah and Tiferet.
Thus, the Sefirot are termed Chochmah, Binah, Daat, Chesed, and so forth, in relation to the beings which are created and vivified by G‑d through His Will and wisdom, and so forth, which clothe themselves in the emotive attributes.
כדאיתא במדרש: בעשרה דברים נברא העולם, בחכמה בתבונה ובדעת וכו׳
As it is stated in the Midrash,7 “By means of ten things was the world created: by wisdom, by understanding and by knowledge,...
דכתיב: ה׳ בחכמה יסד אר׳, כונן שמים בתבונה, בדעתו תהומות נבקעו וגו׳
as it is written,8 ‘G‑d founded the earth with wisdom; He established the heavens with understanding; with His knowledge the depths of the abyss were burst open,’...“;
We thus see from the Midrash9 that the world was created by means of “ten things”, i.e., the Ten Sefirot.
וכמאמר אליהו: דאפיקת עשר תיקונין, וקרינן להון עשר ספירן
and as expressed by Elijah, in the passage that opens with Patach Eliyahu, and forms part of the introduction to Tikkunei Zohar, “You have brought forth ten Tikkunim (‘garments’), and we call them ten Sefirot,
לאנהגא בהון עלמין סתימין דלא אתגליין, ועלמין דאתגליין
through which to direct hidden worlds unrevealed (i.e., worlds that transcend mortal comprehension)and worlds revealed (i.e., worlds that are accessible to mortal comprehension),
ובהון אתכסיאת כו׳
and through them You conceal Yourself...“ — from created beings, so that they will not be able to perceive the Divine life-force that creates and vivifies them.
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Berachot 31b. |
| 2. | Mechilta and Tanchuma on Shmot 19:18. |
| 3. | Bereishit 1:16. |
| 4. | Ibid. 1:5. |
| 5. | Commenting on the above statement that the light “has no existence by itself at all,” the Rebbe notes: “It is impossible to say that in relation to the luminary the light is of absolutely no account, inasmuch as the luminary itself gives significance to light. (Indeed, it is on account of the light that it is termed a luminary.)” |
| 6. | Cf. Yeshayahu 55:9. |
| 7. | Chagigah 12a. The term “Midrash” also embraces the homiletical passages (i.e., the Aggadot) in the Talmud. |
| 8. | Mishlei 3:19-20. |
| 9. | Note of the Rebbe: “Seemingly the author ought to have quoted an explicit statement in the Mishnah [Avot 5:1], ‘The world was created through ten [Divine] utterances.’ But [the Alter Rebbe quotes the Talmud instead, for] the Mishnah speaks of this in relation to the level of Malchut and the revelation (i.e., utterance — as explained above) of every Sefirah, while the proof sought here must relate to Chochmah and Binah, etc., themselves.” |
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassSunday, Tammuz 1, 5777 · June 25, 2017
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Positive Commandment 241
Damage Caused by Arson
"If a fire breaks out and spreads through thorns..."—Exodus 22:5.
We are commanded regarding the laws [of liability] that apply if a person sets a fire [that damages another's property].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Damage Caused by Arson
Positive Commandment 241
Translated by Berel Bell
The 241st mitzvah is that we are commanded to follow the laws regarding damage caused by fire.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "If fire gets out of control and spreads through weeds [...the one who started the fire must pay for the damage.]"
The details of this mitzvah are explained in the 2nd and 6th chapters of tractate Bava Kama.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ibid. 22:5.
• 1 Chapter A Day: To`en veNit`an To`en veNit`an - Chapter 15English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Classo`en veNit`an - Chapter 15
1
The following rules apply when a person raises a protest regarding the ownership of a particular field and brings witnesses who testify that it was known to belong to him. The person in possession produces a deed of sale that he purchased it from the protester and also brings witnesses who testify that he benefited from the land for enough time to establish a claim of ownership. We tell the person in possession at the outset: "Validate your deed of sale." If the deed of sale is validated, it is preferable, and the judgment is based on the deed of sale. If he cannot validate the deed of sale, we rely on the witnesses who testify that he has established a claim of ownership. The person in possession must take a sh'vu 'at hesset that he purchased it from the protester.
א
מי שערער על שדה זו והביא עדים שהיא ידועה לו והביא זה שבתוכה שטר שלקחה ממנו והביא עדים שאכלה שני חזקה, אומרים לו בתחלה קיים שטרך, אם נתקיים הרי טוב וידון בשטר, ואם אי אפשר לו לקיימו סומכין על עדי חזקה וישבע היסת שלקחה.
2
When there are differences between the testimony of the two witnesses who testify that a claim of ownership has been established - e.g., one testifies that the person in possession benefited from wheat for three years and the other testifies that he benefited from barley - their testimony is accepted. For witnesses are not concerned with these particulars. If one witness testifies that the person in possession benefited from the property in the first, third and fifth years, and the other testifies that he benefited in the second, fourth and sixth years, their testimonies cannot be linked together. The rationale is that neither testified concerning the year about which the other testified. Hence, the land and its produce must be returned.
ב
עדי החזקה שהעיד אחד משניהם שאכלה חטים שני חזקה והשני העיד שאכלה שעורים עדותן קיימת שאין העד מדקדק בזה, העיד האחד שאכלה זה שנה ראשונה שלישית וחמישית והשני מעיד שאכלה שניה ורביעית וששית אין עדותן מצטרפת, שבשנה שמעיד בה זה לא העיד בה זה ותחזור הקרקע והפירות.
3
If a person took possession of a field on the assumption that he is the heir and benefited from the field, and then it was discovered that there was another heir who shared a closer connection and is fit to inherit the field, the person who took possession of the field first is obligated to return all the produce that he ate. This applies whether witnesses testified to the closer relative's identity or the person who first took possession of the property acknowledged it.
ג
מי שירד לשדה בחזקת שהוא יורש ואכל פירותיה ונמצא יורש אחר שהוא קרוב ממנו וראוי ליורשה בין שנמצא בעדים בין שהודה לו זה שירד תחלה חייב להחזיר כל הפירות שאכל.
4
The following laws apply when two people are disputing the ownership of a field, each claiming it to be his own, but neither has proof of his claim. These same laws apply when both claimants bring witnesses who testify that the field belongs to them or to their parents, or when each of them brings witnesses who testify that the claimants benefited from the field for the time necessary to establish a claim of ownership, and both pairs of witnesses testify about exactly the same time period. We leave the field in their hands, and whoever overcomes the other one assumes possession. If the other seeks to expropriate the field from him, he must bring proof of his ownership.
If a third party comes, seizes the property from them and takes possession of it, he is removed from it and it is returned to the others.
ד
שנים שהיו עוררין על השדה זה אומר שלי וזה אומר שלי ואין לאחד מהן ראיה, או שהביא כל אחד מהם עדים שהיא שלו או של אבותיו או שהביא כל אחד משניהם עדים שאכלה שני חזקה, והשנים שהעידו בהן אלו הן השנים עצמן שהעידו בהן אלו, מניחין אותה בידיהן וכל המתגבר ירד בה ויהיה האחר מוציא מידו ועליו הראיה, ואם בא שלישי ותקף עליהן וירד לתוכה מסלקין אותו ממנה.
5
If one claimant brings witnesses who testify that the field belonged to his ancestors, that he benefited from it for the period necessary to establish a claim of ownership, and that it is in his possession, and the other brings witnesses who testify that he benefited from it for the period necessary to establish a claim of ownership and that it is in his possession, the testimonies regarding the claims of ownership contradict each other. We grant the field to the person who produced witnesses that it belonged to his ancestors, and give him possession of it.
If the second person also brought witnesses who testify that the field belonged to his ancestors, and so this testimony also involves a contradiction, the court rescinds its initial ruling, removes the first claimant from it, and leaves it in possession of both of them. The one who overpowers the other acquires the right of ownership.
ה
הביא האחד עדים שהיא של אבותיו ושאכלה שני חזקה והרי היא תחת ידו, והביא האחר עדים שאכלה שני חזקה והרי היא תחת ידו, נמצאת עדות החזקה של שניהם מוכחשת, מעמידין אותה ביד זה שהעידו עליו עדי החזקה שהיא של אבותיו ומורידין אותו לתוכה, חזר השני והביא אף הוא עדים שהיא של אבותיו שהרי נמצאת גם עדות זו מוכחשת, חוזרין בית דין ומסלקין ממנה אף הראשון ומניחין אותה ביד שניהם וכל המתגבר ירד בה.
6
When both claimants say that the field belonged to their ancestors, and one brings witnesses who testify that the field belonged to his ancestors, while the other brings witnesses who testify only that he benefited from the field for the period necessary to establish a claim of ownership, the field should be returned to the one who brought witnesses that it belonged to his ancestors. The other claimant must return the produce that he used. The rationale is that he did not issue a claim. Hence, his consumption of the produce does not serve as proof. For any claim of ownership that is not based on a assertion against the owners is of no consequence.
If the person in possession of the field retorts: "Yes. It belonged to your ancestors and you sold it to me. When I originally claimed that it belonged to my ancestors, I meant that my claim of ownership over it is so strong that it is as if it belonged to my ancestors," or he states: "It was my ancestors, because they purchased it from your ancestors, his claim is valid, for he gave an explanation for his original statements. Hence, we allow him to maintain possession.
If at the outset, he claimed: "It belonged to my ancestors and not your ancestors," we do not accept his later claim. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
ו
זה אומר של אבותי וזה אומר של אבותי זה הביא עדים שהיא של אבותיו וזה הביא עדים שאכלה שני חזקה תחזור לזה שהביא עדים שהיא של אבותיו ויחזיר הפירות שאכל, שהרי לא טען כלום ואין אכילתו ראיה שכל חזקה שאין עמה טענה על הבעלים אינה כלום, חזר זה המחזיק ואמר כן של אבותיך היתה ואתה מכרתה לי וזה שטענתי תחלה שהיא של אבותי כלומר שאני סומך עליה והרי היא שלי כשל אבותי, או שאמר של אבותי שלקחוה מאבותיך הרי זו טענה נכונה שהרי נתן אמתלא לדבריו הראשונים ומעמידין אותה בידו, ואם טען בתחלה ואמר של אבותי ולא של אבותיך אין שומעין לו בטענה זו האחרת וכן כל כיוצא בזה.
7
The following rules apply when Reuven was in possession of a field and Shimon came and protested his ownership. Reuven responded: "I purchased this field from Levi and benefited from it for the amount of time necessary to establish a claim of ownership."
Shimon answered him: "I have a validated deed of sale in my possession that I purchased the field from Levi four years ago."
Reuven retorted: "Do you think that it is only three years since I purchased. I purchased it many years ago? My claim precedes yours."
Reuven's claim is acceptable, for it is common for a person to call many years "the amount of time necessary to establish a claim of ownership." Therefore, if Reuven brings witnesses who testify that he benefited from the field for seven years - and he thus would have established a claim of ownership before Shimon purchased the field - he is allowed to retain possession. If, however, he benefited from it for less than seven years, the field is returned to Shimon. The rationale is that Levi could not have issued a greater protest over Reuven's use of the field than selling it to Shimon before Reuven established a claim of ownership.
ז
ראובן שהיה בתוך שדה ובא שמעון וערער עליו ואמר ראובן שדה זו מלוי קניתיה ואכלתי אותה שני חזקה אמר לו שמעון והלא שטר זה מקויים בידי שאני לקחתיה מלוי מהיום ארבע שנים חזר ראובן ואמר וכי תעלה על דעתך ששלש שנים בלבד יש לי משקניתיה שנים רבות יש לי משלקחתיה ואני קדמתיך, הרי טענת ראובן טענה, שאדם קורא לשנים רבות שני חזקה, לפיכך אם הביא ראובן עדים שאכלה שבע שנים שנמצא שאכל שני חזקה קודם שלקחה שמעון מעמידין אותה בידו, אבל אם אכלה פחות משבע שנים תחזור לשמעון שאין לך מחאה גדולה מזו שהרי מכרה קודם שהחזיק ראובן.
8
The following rules apply when one claimant stated: "The field belonged to my ancestors" and brought witnesses who substantiate his claim and another claims: "It belonged to my ancestors," but does not have witnesses. The field should be returned to the one who brought witnesses. All the produce that the other claimant acknowledges consuming is expropriated from him, even though there are no witnesses that he consumed it. The rationale is that he admits that he consumed produce because the field belonged to his ancestors, and there are witnesses that the field belonged to the ancestors of the other claimant. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
ח
זה אומר של אבותי והביא עדים וזה אומר של אבותי ואין לו עדים תחזור לזה שהביא עדים ומוציאין מזה כל פירות שהודה בהן שאכלן אע"פ שאין עליו עדים שאכל, שהרי הוא אומר שמחמת אבותיו אכל והרי העדים שהיה של אבותיו של זה הטוען וכן כל כיוצא בזה.
9
We apply the principle of miggo in the following situation: One person is in possession of a field. Another raises a protest, bringing witnesses who testify that the field once belonged to him. The person in possession states: "I purchased it from you. Here is the deed of sale," and produces a deed that is validated.
The person raising the protest claims that the deed is a forgery. The one in possession admits this, but claims: "I had a valid deed of sale, but I lost it. I took this so that I would have something in hand to intimidate him, so that he would admit that he actually sold it to me."
Since he could have stood by his deed of sale, for it has been validated, his word is accepted. We do not expropriate the field from his possession. He must, however, take a sh'vu'at hesset to support his claim.
ט
הביא המערער עדים שזו השדה שלו וזה שבתוכה טוען ממך לקחתיה והרי שטרי והוציא שטר מקויים טען המערער שהוא מזוייף והודה בעל השטר ואמר כן הוא אבל היה לי שטר כשר ואבד ולקחתי זה שבידי כדי לאיים עליו שיודה שמכר לי באמת, הואיל ואילו רצה היה אומר בשטרו שהרי מקויים הוא הרי זה נאמן ואין מוציאין את השדה מתחת ידו וישבע היסת.
10
The following rules apply when a person protests a colleague's ownership of a field and brings witnesses who testify that the field belongs to him. The person in possession claims: "I purchased the field from you and benefited from it for the time necessary to establish a claim of ownership" and brings witnesses who support his claim.
The protester responded, claiming: "How could you claim that you purchased it from me on this date three years ago? At that time, I was not in this country."
To resolve the question, the court requires the person in possession to bring proof that the person raising the protest was together with him in that city at the time he claims that he sold him the field, even for one day, so that he could have sold it. If he did not bring proof, he is removed from the field.
י
הביא המערער עדים שזו השדה שלו וזה שבתוכה טוען ממך לקחתיה ואכלתיה שני חזקה והביא עדים שאכלה שני חזקה טען המערער ואמר היאך תטעון שלקחת ממני היום שלש שנים ובאותו הזמן לא הייתי במדינה זו, מצריכין זה שבתוכה להביא ראיה שזה פלוני שמערער היה עמו במדינה בזמן הזה שטוען שמכר לו בו אפילו יום אחד כדי שיהיה אפשר שימכור ואם לא הביא מסלקין אותו.
11
The following rules apply when a person journeyed overseas, and the path to his field was lost. These laws apply whether the fields surrounding his field were owned by four different people or they were all purchased from one person. Each of the owners may turn away the claimant, telling him: "What makes you say that your way passes through my property? Maybe it passes through the property of my colleagues?" Hence, the claimant must purchase a path, even though it costs 100 maneh, or he must fly through the air.
Similarly, when the four fields belong to one person who purchased them from four people, he is not required to provide the claimant with a path. For he can tell him: "If I now returned each one his deed of sale, you would not be able to pass through the property of any one of them. And I purchased from each one every right that he possessed."
If, however, there was one person who owned all four fields, and he was this person's neighbor from the beginning until the end, the claimant can tell him: "You certainly must provide me with a path." Hence, he should be given the shortest path through any one of the fields that the owner chooses. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
If the claimant takes possession of a path saying: "This is my path," he may not be removed from it unless the owner of that property brings explicit proof that it never belonged to him.
יא
מי שהלך למדינת הים ואבדה דרך שדהו בין שהיו ארבע השדות המקיפות אותה לארבעה אנשים בין שהיו הארבע שדות קנויות מאחד הרי כל אחד מהן דוחהו ואומר שמא דרך שלך על חברי הוא, לפיכך יקנה לו דרך במאה מנה או יפרח באויר, וכן אם היו ארבע השדות לאיש אחד שקנה אותן מארבעה אין לו עליו דרך שהרי אומר לו עתה אם אחזיר לכל אחד שטרו אין אתה יכול לעבור על אחד מהן ואני קניתי מכל אחד מהן כל זכות שיש לו, אבל אם היה בעל ארבע שדות המקיפו איש אחד והוא בעל המצר שלה מתחלה ועד סוף הרי זה אומר לו מכל מקום דרכי עליך וילך לו בקצרה באי זו שדה שירצה בעל השדה וכן כל כיוצא בזה, ואם החזיק בדרך ואומר זו היא דרכי אין מסלקין אותו ממנה אלא בראיה ברורה.
• 3 Chapters A Day: Hilchot Nizkei Mamon Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Twelve, Hilchot Nizkei Mamon Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Thirteen, Hilchot Nizkei Mamon Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Fourteen
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassHilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Twelve
1
When a person digs a cistern1 in the public domain, and an ox or a donkey falls into it and dies,2 the owner of the cistern is liable and is required to pay the full amount of the damages, as [Exodus 21:34] states: "The owner of the cistern must pay." [This applies] even if the cistern was filled with wads of wool or the like.3[The intent] is not only an ox or a donkey, but any animal, beast or fowl. An ox and a donkey are mentioned only because these are the commonplace [examples].
א
החופר א בור ברשות הרבים ונפל לתוכו שור או חמור ומת אפילו היה הבור מלא גזות של צמר וכיוצא בהן הרי בעל הבור חייב לשלם נזק שלם שנאמר בעל הבור ישלם. ואחד שור וחמור או שאר מיני בהמה חיה ועוף לא נאמר שור וחמור אלא בהווה:
2
[The above applies] regardless of whether the person digs a cistern in the public domain,4 he digs it in his own property - but it is open to the public domain or to a domain belonging to a colleague5 - or he digs it in his own property with the opening to his own property, but afterwards, he declares the property - but not the cistern - ownerless.6 In all these instances, [the person who digs the cistern] is liable for the damages suffered. If, however, he declared his domain and the cistern ownerless, or he declared the cistern ownerless [while retaining possession of] his domain, or he consecrated it, he is not liable. [This is derived from the phrase:] "The owner of the cistern will pay." [Implied is that the cistern] must have an owner, while this cistern is ownerless. [Moreover, it cannot be compared to a cistern dug in the public domain,] since at the outset he was permitted to dig [the cistern], because it was on his property.
ב
אחד החופר בור ברשות הרבים או החופר בור [א] ברשותו ופתחו לרשות הרבים או פתח לרשות חבירו או שחפר ופתח לרשותו והפקיר רשותו ולא הפקיר בורו הרי זה חייב בנזקיו א אבל אם הפקיר רשותו ובורו או שהפקיר בורו שברשותו או הקדישו הרי זה פטור שנאמר בעל הבור ישלם מי שיש לו בעלים וזה הפקר ובתחילה ברשות חפר מפני שחפר ברשותו:
3
[The above applies whether the person] dug the cistern himself, it came into being [on his property] through natural means, or it was dug by an animal or a beast.7 Since he is required to fill it up or cover it, and he did not, he is liable for the damages. [Similarly, the above applies] whether the person digs [the cistern himself] or purchases or receives as a present [a domain with a cistern]. This is derived from the phrase:] "The owner of the cistern will pay." [Implied is that if the cistern] has an owner [he is liable].
ג
אחד החופר בור או שנחפר מאליו או שחפרתו בהמה או חיה הואיל והוא חייב למלאותו או לכסותו ולא עשה הרי זה חייב בנזקיו. ואחד החופר או הלוקח או שנתן לו במתנה שנאמר בעל הבור ישלם מי שיש לו בעלים מכל מקום:
4
Just as a person who digs [a cistern is liable], so too, is one who opens a cistern that was covered, as [Exodus 21:33] states: "If a person opens a cistern, or if a person digs a cistern." If [an owner] covered up a cistern in an appropriate manner and the cover decayed from within, and [because of this], an ox fell into the cistern and died, the owner is not liable. For the above verse continues: "And he did not cover it." And in this case, he covered it.8 [The following laws apply if the owner] covered [the cistern] with a covering that was strong enough to have oxen tread on it, but was not strong enough to have camels tread on it, camels trod on it and it became weakened, and then oxen trod on it and fell in. If camels are not [usually] found in such a place, [the owner] is not liable,9 for this is considered a factor beyond his control. If camels pass through this place, even infrequently, he is liable.10
ד
אחד החופר או המגלה מקום שהיה מכוסה שנאמר כי יפתח איש בור או כי יכרה, ואם כסהו כראוי אע"פ שהתליע מתוכו ונפל לתוכו שור ומת פטור שנאמר ולא יכסנו הא אם כסהו פטור. כסהו בדבר שיכול לעמוד בפני שוורים ואינו יכול לעמוד בפני גמלים והלכו עליו גמלים ונתרועע והלכו עליו שוורים ונפלו בו. אם אין הגמלים מצויין באותו מקום הרי זה פטור מפני שזה אונס ואם יבואו שם גמלים אפילו לפרקים הרי זה חייב:
5
If [the cover] decayed from within and oxen fell into [the cistern], [the owner] is not liable. [This applies even when] camels frequent this area, and [the owner] is consider negligent with regard to the camels. Nevertheless, since the oxen fell into [the cistern], because [the cover] decayed [it is considered to be a loss beyond the owner's control].11 The same applies in all similar situations.
ה
6
When a person discovers a cistern and covers it, and afterwards uncovers it, the owner12 of the cistern is liable, and the person who [covered and uncovered it] is not liable.13 If, however, he filled [the cistern] with earth and then removed the earth, he [and not the original owner of the cistern] is liable. Since he filled the cistern with earth, the actions of the person who originally [dug the cistern] are considered to have been nullified.14
ו
7
[The following rules apply when] a cistern is owned by two partners. If the first passed by and did not cover it, and then the second passed by and did not cover it, the first is liable15 until he gives his buckets16 to the second [partner]. Once he gives his buckets to the second partner to draw water from it, the first is freed of liability, and the second becomes liable. If the first [partner] covered it, and the second partner passed by and saw it uncovered and left it so, he is liable.17 Until when does the second [partner] bear the sole responsibility of covering it? Until the first [partner] becomes aware18 that it is open and has the opportunity to hire workers to cut down trees and cover it. If any animal dies during this time, the second partner alone is liable. If an animal dies afterwards, both [partners] are liable, for they both were negligent.
ז
בור של שני שותפין ועבר הראשון ולא כסהו השני ולא כסהו הראשון ב חייב עד שימסור דליו לשני ומשמסר דליו לשני לדלות ממנו נפטר הראשון ונתחייב השני לכסותו. כסהו הראשון ובא השני ומצאו מגולה ולא כסהו השני חייב. ועד אימתי יהיה השני לבדו חייב עד שידע הראשון שהבור מגולה וכדי שישכור פועלים ויכרות ארזים ויכסנו וכל שימות בו תוך זמן זה הרי השני לבדו חייב בו וכל שימות בו אחר זמן כזה שניהן חייבין לשלם
8
When a person transfers [the responsibility for] his cistern to a watchman, [the watchman] is liable for the damages. If, however, the owner gave it to a deaf mute, a mentally incompetent individual or a minor to watch, the owner is liable. [This applies] even if he left it covered, because it is likely that a cistern will be uncovered, and these individuals are not mentally competent [to know that it must be covered at all times].19
ח
המוסר בורו לשומר חייב בנזקיו. ואם מסרו לחרש שוטה וקטן אע"פ שהיה מכוסה הרי הבעלים חייבים שהבור עשוי להתגלות ואלו
9
ט
המכסה בורו בדליו של חבירו ובא בעל הדלי ונטל דליו בעל הבור חייב:
10
[The above laws apply whether] one digs a cistern, a ditch, a cave or a trench. Why does the Torah mention a cistern? [To teach that its depth] must be sufficient to kill. How much is considered sufficient to kill? A depth of ten handbreadths.22 If a cistern was less than ten handbreadths deep23 and an ox or another animal, beast or fowl falls in and dies, [the one responsible for the obstruction] is not liable.24 If the animal is damaged, the one responsible for the obstruction must pay the full extent of the damages.
י
אחד החופר בור או שיח או מערה או חריץ ולמה נאמר בור עד שיהיה בו כדי להמית. וכמה כדי להמית עומק עשרה טפחים אבל אם היה פחות מעשרה ונפל לתוכו שור או שאר בהמה חיה ועוף ומת פטור. ואם הוזקו חייב בעל התקלה נזק שלם:
11
If a cistern was nine handbreadths deep, and one of those handbreadths was filled with water, [the owner] is liable [if an animal falls in and dies]. [The rationale is] that one handbreadth with water is considered equivalent to two handbreadths without water.25 If [the cistern] was eight [handbreadths] deep and two handbreadths [were filled with] water, or it was seven [handbreadths] deep and three handbreadths [were filled with] water, and an ox or the like fell in and died, [the owner of the cistern] is not held liable to pay [for the death of the animal]. If [the owner of the animal seized [compensation for his loss from the owner of the cistern's property],26 [the property he seized] is not expropriated from him. [The rationale is] that there is a doubt regarding this issue.27
יא
היה עומק הבור תשעה ומהן טפח אחד מים חייב. שהטפח של מים חשוב כעומק שני טפחים ביבשה. היה עמוק שמונה ומהן שני טפחים מים או שהיה עומקו שבעה ומהן שלשה טפחים מים ונפל לתוכו שור וכיוצא בו ומת אין מחייבין אותו לשלם. ואם תפש הניזק אין מוציאין מידו שהדברים האלו יש בהן ספק:
12
When one person digs a cistern ten handbreadths deep, a second person comes and [digs deeper], making it twenty handbreadths deep, and a third person comes and [digs deeper], making it thirty handbreadths deep, they all share in the liability.28 When the first digs even one handbreadth less than ten handbreadths, and another makes it ten handbreadths deep - either by digging another handbreadth deeper or building a rim of a handbreadth at its edge - the latter person [alone] is liable.29 If afterwards he filled up the handbreadth he added or destroyed the rim he built, it is unresolved whether the first person's deed is no longer considered of consequence30 [and therefore, he is not liable,] or whether his actions are still considered significant.31
יב
החופר בור עמוק עשרה טפחים ובא אחר והשלימו לעשרים ובא אחר והשלימו לשלשים כולן חייבים. חפר הראשון פחות מעשרה אפילו טפח ובא האחרון והשלימו לעשרה בין שחפר בו טפח או שהגביה בנין על שפתו טפח זה האחרון חייב. סתם טפח שהוסיף או שסתר טפח שבנה הרי זה ספק אם כבר נסתלק מעשה ראשון או עדיין לא נסתלק:
13
[The following rules apply when a person] dug a deep cistern,32 another person came and made it wider, and an ox fell into it and died. If [it is obvious that33 the ox] died because of the air within the cistern, the second person is not liable, for [his act] improved [the quality of] the air.34 If [it is obvious that the ox] died because of the blow [it received], the second person is liable, for [his act] brought closer [the possibility] that this cistern would cause damage.35 Similarly, if the ox fell from the side that the person widened, [and died because of the air of the cistern],36 the second person is held liable despite the fact that [the ox] died from [the cistern's foul] air.37 If [the ox] fell from the side that was dug by the first person, the first person is liable, for the second person improved [the quality of] the air.38
יג
חפר הראשון בור עמוק ובא האחרון והרחיבו ונפל לתוכו שור ומת. אם מחמת הבלו מת האחרון פטור שהרי מיעט הבלו ואם מחמת חבטו מת האחרון חייב שהרי הוא הקריב היזק בור זה. וכן אם נפל השור מאותו הצד שהרחיב האחרון האחרון חייב שהרי הקריב היזק בור זה אע"פ שמת מן ההבל. ואם מן הצד שחפר הראשון נפל הראשון חייב שזה האחרון מיעט הבלו:
14
The liability that the Torah imposed for [damages caused by falling into] a cistern applies even when the animal died merely because of the [foul] air within the cistern. Needless to say, it applies when the animal dies because of the blow it received.39 If the width of the cistern was the same as its depth, it will not have [foul] air. Thus, if the animal did not receive a blow [when it fell] and yet it died, [the owner of the cistern] is not liable.40If the depth exceeds its width, it has [foul] air. If an animal dies [after falling in], [the owner] is liable, even though it did not receive a blow from the bottom [of the cistern].41
יד
בור שחייבה עליו התורה אפילו לא מתה הבהמה אלא מהבלו [ב] ואין צריך לומר אם מתה מחבטו. לפיכך אם היה עומק הבור כרחבו אין לו הבל. ואם לא נחבטה בו הבהמה ומתה פטור. היה עומקו יתר על רחבו יש לו הבל ואם מתה בו הבהמה חייב אע"פ שלא נחבטה בקרקעיתה:
15
[The following rules apply when] a person erects a high mound in the public domain, and an animal receives a blow from it and dies.42If [the mound] was ten handbreadths high, he is liable to pay [for the damages]. If it was less than ten handbreadths high, he is not liable if the animal dies. If, however, an animal is merely injured, he is liable for the full extent of the damages. Even if a mound is of minimal height, or one digs [a pit of] minimal depth, [and an animal is injured, one is liable]. For it is a frequent occurrence for injuries to be caused by a mound or a pit of minimal height or depth. For [an animal] to die because of such a mound or pit is not a frequent occurrence; it is considered to be an event beyond one's control.43
טו
עשה תל גבוה ברשות הרבים ונחבטה בו הבהמה ומתה. אם היה גבוה עשרה טפחים חייב לשלם. ואם היה פחות מעשרה פטור על מיתת הבהמה. אבל אם הוזקה בלבד חייב לשלם נזק שלם. ואפילו בתל גבוה כל שהוא או בחפירה כל שהיא. שהנזק בכל שהוא דבר מצוי וידוע ואין המיתה בכל שהוא מצוייה והרי הוא כמו אונס:
16
Similarly, a person is not liable for the death of an animal that [fell] into a cistern or that received a blow from a mound unless the animal was small, a deaf mute or mentally incompetent,44or it was blind, or it fell at night.45 If, however, the animal was mentally competent, and it fell into [the cistern] during the day, [the owner of the cistern] is not liable. This is considered like an event beyond a person's control. For it is the ordinary practice for an animal to see where it is going and to avoid obstacles. Similarly, if a human fell into the pit and died, the owner is not liable.46 This applies even if he was blind or fell at night,47and regardless of whether he was a free man or a servant. If a mentally competent human or animal suffered injury because of [the cistern], [the owner] is liable for the full extent of the damages,48 as explained [in the previous halachah].49
טז
וכן אינו חייב על מיתת הבהמה בבור או על חביטתה בתל. אלא אם היתה הבהמה קטנה או חרשת או שוטה או סומא או שנפלה בלילה. אבל אם
17
If an ox that had been consecrated as a sacrificial offering and then disqualified50 fell into [the cistern] and died, the owner is not liable.51 [This law is derived as follows. Exodus 21:34] states: "The dead body will belong to [its owner]." [The liability for the animal's death stated in the verse applies only] when the dead body belongs to [the owner].52 This excludes the case at hand, for it is forbidden to benefit from [the body of this animal], and it must be buried.53
יז
נפל לתוכו
18
[The following laws apply when] a person was digging a cistern and the noise of the digging caused an animal to fall into the pit and die. If [the animal] fell forwards, [the owner of the cistern] is liable. If it fell backwards - i.e., it was startled [by the sound] and retreated and then fell - [the owner] is not liable. [The latter law is derived as follows. Exodus 21:33 states: "When an ox...] falls," [implied is that for the person to be liable], the ox must fall in an ordinary manner.54 If [the animal] fell forward outside the cistern because of the sound of the digging and died, the court does not hold the owner of the cistern liable.55 If the person [whose ox died] seizes property [belonging to the owner of the cistern], it is not expropriated from him. If [the animal] fell backward outside the cistern and died or was injured, the owner of the cistern is not liable.
יח
היה חופר בבור ונפלה הבהמה בתוך הבור מקול החפירה ומתה. אם נפלה מלפניה חייב מאחריה כגון שנבעתה וחזרה על עקבה לאחור ונפלה ומתה פטור שנאמר ונפל עד שיפול דרך נפילה. נפלה לפניה מקול החפירה
19
[The following rules apply when] an ox pushes another animal into a cistern and it dies. If [the ox] is mu'ad,56 the owner of the cistern is required to pay half [the damages], and the owner of the ox the [other] half.57 If [the ox] is tam, the owner of the ox must pay one-fourth [of the damages] from the body of the ox,58while the owner of the cistern must pay three-fourths of the damage from his most choice property. For the owner of the dead animal may say to the owner of the cistern: "You owe me for the depreciation in value of this dead animal. Although it was a mature animal and mentally competent, it is as if it fell at night.59 I will collect whatever I can from the owner of the ox. You are liable to pay me the remainder."60
יט
שור שדחף בהמה לתוך הבור ומתה. אם מועד הוא בעל הבור משלם מחצה ובעל השור מחצה. ואם תם הוא בעל השור משלם רביע מגופו ובעל הבור משלם שלשה חלקים מן היפה שבנכסיו. שבעל הנבילה אומר לבעל הבור פחת נבילה זו יש לי אצלך אע"פ שהיא גדולה ופקחת כיון שנדחפה הרי זו כמי שנפלה בלילה כל שאני יכול להוציא מבעל השור אני מוציא [ג] והשאר אתה חייב לשלמו:
20
Similarly, if a person places a stone at the edge of a cistern, and an ox stumbles over it and falls into the cistern and dies, the person who placed the stone there must pay [half the damages],61 and the owner of the cistern must pay the [other] half.
כ
וכן המניח אבן על פי הבור ובא השור ונתקל בה ונפל לבור ומת. המניח את האבן משלם מחצה ובעל הבור מחצה:
21
Similarly,62 [the following laws apply when] an ordinary ox and an ox that was consecrated as a sacrifice and then disqualified gored another ox together. If the ordinary ox is a tam, [its owner] should pay half the damages. If it is mu'ad, [its owner] must pay the entire damages. [The entire burden falls on this person,] because the owner of the ox that suffered the damage will say to him: "I will collect all that I can from the other ox, and you are liable for the remainder. In this instance, since the other ox is consecrated and therefore [its owner is] not held liable,63 you must pay me the entire amount."
כא
וכן שור של הדיוט ושל פסולי המוקדשין שנגחו כאחד. אם תם הוא זה של הדיוט משלם חצי נזק ואם מועד נזק שלם. שהניזק אומר לו כל שאוכל להוציא מזה אוציא והשאר ממך וזה הואיל והקדש הוא ופטור אתה תשלם לי הכל:
22
כב
מי שהיה חופר בור ברשות הרבים ונפל עליו שור והרגו. בעל השור פטור. ואם מת השור נוטל בעל השור דמי שורו מיורשי בעל הבור:
FOOTNOTES
1.
The Rambam has completed his discussion of the first two general categories of damages: grazing and goring. He now goes on to the third category. The damages caused by a cistern.Payment of these damages is also considered one of the Torah's 613 mitzvot (Sefer HaMitzvot, Positive Commandment 238, and Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvah 53). This mitzvah can be defined as compensating a person for the death or damage to animals he owns that came as a result of an object owned by another person, which serves as a stumbling block.
2.
The Rambam's wording is taken from Exodus 21:33.
3.
In which case the death of the animal was not caused by its fall, but by the foul air of the cistern. Even so, the owner of the cistern is held liable.
4.
Although the cistern does not actually belong to him - for it is in the public domain - since he dug it without permission, the Torah holds him liable for the damages as if it were his own.
5.
Since the opening of the cistern is accessible to others, its owner should have taken precautions and made certain that it was covered.The Tur (Choshen Mishpat 410) maintains that this applies only until the owner of the adjoining courtyard is made aware of the cistern's presence. Once the owner of the courtyard knows about the presence of the cistern, he is liable.
6.
Since he declared the property ownerless, the cistern is accessible to others and therefore should be covered.
7.
This applies even when the cistern was dug by an animal belonging to someone else. As long as a cistern accessible to the public exists within a person's domain, he is liable to cover it. Moreover, the Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 410:4) add that even if the cistern is dug by another human being, the owner of the cistern is liable for any damages caused as soon as he discovers it.
8.
From this, Ki'nat Eliyahu draws the conclusion that the owner is not required to check the cover continually to see that it is strong enough to serve its purpose.
9.
The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 410:23) state that if, however, a camel falls into the cistern, the owner is liable. This is not considered a factor beyond his control.
10.
For he should have protected against such a possibility.
11.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, explaining as follows: As mentioned in Chapter 2, Halachah 15, even though ultimately damage was caused because of forces beyond one's control, if one has been negligent at the outset, one is liable. Therefore, in this instance, although the decay of the cover is considered to be beyond the owner's control, since he had been negligent in not covering the cistern with a cover strong enough to support camels, he should be held liable.The Maggid Mishneh justifies the Rambam's ruling, explaining that the above principle applies when the negligence can, at least to a certain extent, be considered a cause of the loss suffered by forces beyond one's control. In this instance, however, the fact that the cover was not sufficient to support camels can in no way be considered a cause of the decay of the cover.The Maggid Mishneh's resolution is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 410:24). Note the Tur and the Ramah, who develop the latter principle further.
12.
I.e., the one who dug the cistern in the public domain, who is held responsible for its damages.
13.
For he has merely returned the situation to its original state.Note the comments of the Maggid Mishneh, who - in response to the objections of the Ra'avad - explains that this law applies even when the owner saw the other person covering the cistern. The owner should know not to rely on a person who is not the cistern's owner (Sefer Me'irat Einayim 410:3).
14.
It is as if the second person had dug the cistern himself (ibid.:4).
15.
It appears that the Rambam's intent is that only the first partner is liable. Rabbenu Asher and his conception is quoted by the Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 410:25) explains that since both partners saw the cistern uncovered, they are both liable. The Talmud's intent by saying the first is liable, is that he must share in the liability. He cannot excuse himself by saying: Since the other partner saw it after me, he must bear the entire responsibility.
16.
Note the Lechem Mishneh who, based on Halachah 9, explains that the buckets were used as the covering for the cistern. See the commentaries of Rashi and Rabbenu Chanan'el on Bava Kama 51b.
17.
The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 410:26) explain that the second partner is also given time to hire workers to cover the cistern.
18.
The Ra'avad interprets the Rambam's words as meaning until he would ordinarily know, while the Maggid Mishneh explains that the intent is until he actually finds out.
19.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, explaining that if the cistern is covered thoroughly, the owner is not held liable. The Maggid Mishneh upholds the Rambam's ruling, and Sefer Me'irat Einayim 410:45 explains that furthermore, we have reason to believe that the mentally incompetents opened the covering themselves.
20.
That were taken without his colleague's permission.
21.
For he should have taken into consideration the possibility that the owner of the buckets would take them back. The owner of the buckets is not obligated to notify him.
22.
For a cistern is usually at least ten handbreadths deep, while the others may not be that deep.See parallels to this ruling in Hilchot Shechitah 9:8 and Hilchot Rotzeach 3:7.
23.
Even if its depth is small, if it presents a difficulty that could cause an animal to stumble and suffer damage, the owner is liable (Maggid Mishneh). See Halachah 15.
24.
For under ordinary circumstances, a fall of less than ten handbreadths will not cause an animal to die.
25.
The rationale is that the water impairs the quality of the air in the cistern and hastens the animal's death.
26.
See Chapter 1, Halachah 11 and notes.
27.
Therefore, the money is allowed to remain in the possession of the litigant - either the owner of the pit or the owner of the animal - in whose possession it is at the time the matter is brought to court.
28.
Since each of them dug an amount sufficient to cause death, the damages are equally divided among them.
29.
He is solely liable both for damages and for death. The rationale is that the original cistern was not deep enough to cause death. Hence, when the second person deepened it, making it deep enough to cause death, he is considered to have brought into being a new entity for which he alone is liable if it causes damages.
30.
According to this view, once the second person deepened the cistern, it is considered to be his handiwork entirely, as if the first person no longer had any connection to it. Therefore, the second person has the responsibility of covering the cistern, and paying for any damages that might be caused.
31.
Therefore, neither of the people who dug the cistern can be held liable. According to the views that maintain that a person who seizes property when an unresolved doubt exists is allowed to maintain possession, if the person whose property was damaged seizes property from either or both of the persons who dug the cistern, he is entitled to maintain possession (Sefer Me'irat Einayim 410:33).
32.
I.e., ten or more handbreadths deep.
33.
This addition is made based on the comments of Sefer Me'irat Einayim 410:24. It helps reconcile the difficulties with the Rambam's interpretation mentioned in the notes that follow.
34.
By widening the cistern, he enabled more fresh air to circulate.
35.
By widening the cistern, he made it more likely that an animal would fall in. Therefore, he is considered to be the owner of the cistern and is held responsible for the damages, even when the animal fell from the other side.
36.
This addition is made on the basis of the comments of Sefer Me'irat Einayim 410:25.
37.
And the second person improved the quality of the air. Nevertheless, he is held liable, because had he not widened the cistern, it is possible that the ox would not have fallen in.
38.
The Rambam's ruling has attracted the attention of the commentaries, because it appears to fuse together two dissenting Talmudic opinions (Bava Kama 51b). As the Maggid Mishneh explains, according to the first of the opinions mentioned in that passage, it appears that what is significant is whether the animal died because of the blow it received or because of the foul air in the cistern, while according to the second opinion, what is significant is the side from which the animal fell.The Kessef Mishneh reconciles the Rambam's interpretation, explaining that the Rambam did not see the two interpretations as being contradictory, for if that were the case, each one could be refuted by an obvious question. According to the first opinion: Why would the first person be held liable if the ox died because of the air in the cistern if the ox fell in from the side that the other person widened? Had he not widened it, the ox might not have fallen in.According to the second opinion, the question arises: Since the second person's action makes him liable if an ox falls in, what difference does it make from which side it fell.For these reasons, the Rambam maintains that the two opinions are complementary. See the D'rishah (Choshen Mishpat 410), which offers an alternate resolution of the Rambam's view. Rabbenu Asher, the Tur, and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 410:16) differ with the Rambam and follow the second opinion, which maintains that the liability depends on the side from which the ox fell.
39.
This ruling is the subject of a difference of opinion among the Sages of the Talmud (Bava Kama 50b). The Rambam accepts the opinion of the sage Shmuel.
40.
For the animal is considered to have died because of forces beyond the owner's control (Sefer Me'irat Einayim 410:28).
41.
I.e., there were substances at the bottom of the cistern that cushioned the animal's fall (Tur, Choshen Mishpat 410).
42.
The Rambam's wording is carefully chosen. As opposed to the owner of a cistern, who can be held liable whether the animal dies from the blow it receives or from the foul air, a person who erects a mound can be held liable only when the animal dies because of the blow it receives.
43.
See Hilchot Chovel UMazik 1:18.
44.
In all three of these instances, the person who dug the cistern or who erected the mound is liable, for the animal is considered to be mentally incompetent and unable to appreciate the danger that the cistern or mound could cause.
45.
In these instances, although the animal was mentally competent, since it could not see the cistern or the mound, it was unable to appreciate the danger.
46.
This is a decree of Torah law. Commenting on Exodus 21:33: If an ox or a donkey fall into it, Bava Kama 28b, 52a states: An ox' and not a man, a donkey,' and not utensils.
47.
For the leniency is not a result of the fact that a person takes care while walking, but a result of the Torah's decree.
48.
Although the owner must pay the full extent of the damages, he is not liable for the medical treatment, pain, embarrassment, and loss of employment suffered by the person, as stated in Chapter 14, Halachah 15.
49.
With regard to an injury suffered by a human being, Tosafot, Bava Kama 27b explains that the Torah freed the owner of a cistern from liability only when a person died because of a fall (as is the case in the verse cited above), and not when he became injured. Even if the injury is suffered during the day, the person is liable, because it is not common for a person to look carefully at the road on which he is walking.With regard to an injury suffered by an animal, the Rambam's ruling is the subject of a difference of opinion among our Rabbis. The Ra'avad maintains that just as the owner of the cistern is not liable for the death of a mentally competent animal that falls during the daytime, he is not liable for its injury.The Maggid Mishneh justifies the Rambam's ruling, explaining that although an animal may act with caution with regard to obstacles that can cause more severe damages, it will not be as sensitive with regard to obstacles that can cause lesser damages. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 410:20) quotes the Rambam's view, while the Tur and the Ramah follow that of the Ra'avad. Note, however, the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 412:3), which appears to follow the approach of the Ra'avad.
50.
E.g., an animal that suffered a disqualifying physical blemish after being consecrated. This law applies even in the present age, with regard to a firstborn animal.
51.
In Hilchot Chovel UMazik 6:16, the Rambam states that this leniency applies even when the animal is merely injured.
52.
And he is permitted to benefit from it.
53.
Note the Ra'avad, who states that this leniency applies even when the disqualified animal has already been redeemed by its owner. Although the Rambam's wording does not appear to include such an instance (for then, it is permitted to benefit from the animal), the Maggid Mishneh states that he would accept the Ra'avad's ruling.
54.
The Ra'avad questions the Rambam's ruling, because it appears to contradict the understanding of Bava Kama 52b-53a. First of all, the Talmud explains that this matter is dependent on a difference of opinion between Rav and Shmuel. In Halachah 15, the Rambam rules according to Shmuel, while here his ruling appears closer to that of Rav. According to the Ra'avad, if the animal fell backwards into the cistern, the owner of the cistern is not held liable, but if the owner seizes property belonging to the other, it is not expropriated from him.The Rambam's interpretation of this passage is obviously problematic. In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Bava Kama 5:6), his interpretation also appears to differ from this halachah. There he writes that if the ox falls backwards into the cistern, the owner of the cistern is liable. If he falls backwards outside the cistern, the owner of the cistern is not liable. This understanding is reflected in the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 410:31).
55.
For the animal died because of the blow it received from the land in the public domain, and not that of the cistern. The Ra'avad differs with regard to this clause as well and maintains that the property of the cistern's owner may not be seized. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 410:31) also follows that understanding.
56.
In which case, its owner is ordinarily responsible for the full extent of the damages it causes.
57.
The ox that pushes the animal and the cistern into which it fell are considered equally responsible for the damage. Had the ox not been pushed, it would not have fallen. Had the cistern not been uncovered in the public domain, the ox would also not have fallen.
58.
For the owner of an ox that is tam is required to pay half of the damages (in this case, half of a half), and that payment can be expropriated only from the body of the ox that did the damage. If the ox is not worth that amount, the owner is not obligated to pay any more.
59.
I.e., one cannot say that the animal should have avoided the obstacles.
60.
For had the cistern not been there, the animal would not have died.
61.
As explained in the following chapter, placing any obstacle in the public domain is a derivative of digging a cistern and causes one to be liable for the damages suffered. In this instance, the person who placed the stone and the one who dug the cistern are considered to be partners in this liability, for were it not for the stone, the animal would not have fallen. And were it not for the cistern, the fall would not have resulted in its death.
62.
This is another example of a case where two people are considered to be partners in damage that is caused. Each is considered to be liable for the entire amount. Nevertheless, since the person whose property was damaged does not have to receive more than the amount he lost, the loss is divided between the two (Bava Kama 53a). In this instance, as in Halachah 19, the owner of the dead animal cannot collect from the owner of the ox that was disqualified as a sacrifice. Hence, he collects the entire amount from the owner of the other ox.
63.
See Chapter 8, Halachah 1, from which it is evident that the present halachah refers to an ox that was consecrated, disqualified, but not redeemed as yet.
64.
I.e., he does not have to pay an atonement fine, nor is the ox stoned, as reflected by the ruling in Chapter 10, Halachah 9. The person digging the cistern is considered to be negligent, and the fact that the ox fell is his responsibility.
65.
See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 11:4.
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Thirteen
1
When utensils fall into a cistern and break, the owner of the cistern is not liable.1 [This is derived from Exodus 21:33, which] states: "And an ox or a donkey fell there." The Oral Tradition interprets2 this as an exclusion: "'An ox' and not a man;3'a donkey' and not utensils." Even when an ox fell [into a cistern] when carrying utensils and died and broke the utensils, the owner is liable for the ox, but not for the utensils.
א
כלים א שנפלו לבור ונשתברו בעל הבור פטור שנאמר ונפל שמה שור או חמור מפי השמועה למדו שור ולא אדם חמור ולא כלים. אפילו נפל שור בכליו ומת השור ונשתברו כליו חייב על הבהמה ופטור על הכלים:
2
A cistern is considered one of the general categories of causes of damage. Its derivatives, like it, are considered mu'adim from the outset. Whenever a person leaves an obstacle [in the path of other living beings], it is considered to be a derivative of a cistern.4 If a person or an animal is injured because of it, the person who caused the obstacle to exist is liable, whether or not he renounced ownership of it. If it caused damage to utensils, [the person responsible] is not held liable.
ב
הבור מאבות נזיקין הוא ותולדותיו כמוהו מועדין מתחילתן. וכל המניח תקלה הרי זו תולדת הבור ואם הוזק בה אדם או בהמה משלם זה שהניח התקלה נזק שלם בין הפקיר [א] התקלה בין לא הפקירה. ואם הוזקו בה כלים פטור:
3
What is implied? When a person leaves his stone, his knife, his straw, his burden or the like in the public domain, and they cause injury to another human or to an animal, [the first person] is liable for the full amount of the damages. Similarly, if he left such items on his property and declared his property - but not these items - ownerless, and a person stumbled on the ground5and received a blow from such an item that caused him injury, the person who caused the obstacle to exist is liable. If the person's utensils became damaged or soiled in such a situation, [the person who caused the obstacle to exist] is not liable.
ג
כיצד המניח אבנו או סכינו או תבנו או משאו וכיוצא בהן ברשות הרבים והוזקו בהן בין אדם בין בהמה חייב נזק שלם וכן אם הניחן ברשותו והפקיר רשותו ולא הפקירן נתקל בקרקע ונחבט בתקלה זו והוזק בה חייב בעל התקלה. ואם הוזקו כלים בכל אלו או נטנפו פטור:
4
If a person brought his ox into a courtyard belonging to another person without permission, the ox defecated, and the feces soiled utensils belonging to the owner, [the owner of the ox] is not liable. For the feces are considered to be a derivative of a cistern, and [the owner of] a cistern is never liable for damage to utensils.
ד
הכניס שורו לחצר בעל הבית שלא ברשות והרביץ גללים ונטנפו בהן כליו של בעל הבית פטור. שהגלל זה תולדת בור הוא ולא מצאנו בור שחייב בו על הכלים:
5
[The following laws apply when a person] leaves his jug in the public domain, and a passerby stumbles over it and breaks it. The passerby is not liable, because it is not the practice of people to look out on the way as they walk. If [the passerby] was injured, the owner of the jug is liable for his injury. [This applies] even if he declared his jug ownerless. For whenever a person declares ownerless an obstacle that he has created in a domain in which he has no permission to place it at the outset,6 he is liable, as if he had never declared it ownerless.
ה
המניח את הכד ברשות הרבים והלך [המהלך] ונתקל בה ושברה פטור לפי שאין דרך בני [ב] אדם להתבונן בדרך כשהן מהלכין. ואם הוזק בה הרי בעל הכד חייב בנזקיו ואפילו הפקיר הכד. שכל המפקיר נזקיו במקום שאין לו רשות לעשותה מתחלה חייב כאילו לא הפקירן:
6
If the person placed the jug down in a place where he had permission to place it - e.g., the marketplace before the wine vats or the like7 - and a passerby stumbles over it and breaks it, [the passerby] is liable. If the passerby was injured, the owner of the jug is not liable, because [the passerby] should have looked to see [if there was anything in his way].8 If it was dark or [if the owner of the jugs] filled the entire path with jugs, the passerby is not liable for breaking it. If he is injured, the owner of the jugs is liable.9 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
ו
הניח את הכד במקום שיש לו רשות להניחה שם כגון מקום הקרנות של גיתות וכיוצא בהן ונתקל בה ושברה חייב. ואם הוזק בה המהלך בעל הכד פטור מפני שהיה לו להסתכל. ואם היתה אפלה או שמילא כל הדרך כדים פטור [ג] על שבירתה ואם נתקל בה הרי בעל הכד חייב וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
7
[The following rules apply when] a jug belonging to a person breaks [accidentally] in the public domain, and another person slips on the water [that spilled] or receives a blow from its shards. The owner cannot be held liable by an earthly court, because [the jug] was broken by accident.10 He has, however, a moral and a spiritual obligation, because he did not gather the shards.11 The shards and the water are like ownerless entities, [even though] he did not rescind his ownership until after the accident, he is not held liable. If he intended to take possession of the shards, and another person was damaged by them, he is liable. Similar laws apply to a person whose camel fell and he did not raise it up, or the like.12 In all these situations, if utensils were damaged, the owner of the obstacle is not liable, whether he declared his object ownerless or not, as we have explained.13
ז
נשברה כדו ברשות הרבים והוחלק אחד במים או שלקה בחרסיה פטור מדיני אדם לפי שאנוס הוא. וחייב בדיני שמים מפני שלא סילק החרסים. והרי החרסים והמים כהפקר ולא הפקיר אלא אחר שנאנס ולפיכך פטור. ואם נתכוון לזכות בחרסיה והוזק בהן אחר חייב. והוא הדין לנפלה גמלו ולא העמידה וכל כיוצא בה. ואם הוזקו כלים בכל אלו פטור בין הפקיר בין לא הפקיר כמו שביארנו:
8
[The following laws apply when] two potters were following each other on a path, the first tripped and fell, and the second tripped over the first. If the first could have stood up but failed to do so, he is liable for the damages suffered by the second. Although he accidentally fell, the accident did not [force him to remain] lying in the road. [Therefore,] since he could have stood up, [he is liable].14 If he was unable to have risen [before the second potter tripped over him], he is not liable. [This applies] even though he did not warn [the potter] who tripped over him. [The rationale is] that he is concerned with his own [difficulties].15
ח
שני קדרים שהיו מהלכין בדרך זה אחר זה ונתקל הראשון ונפל ונתקל השני בראשון. אם היה לראשון לעמוד ולא עמד חייב הראשון בנזקי שני שאע"פ שהוא אנוס בשעת נפילה אינו אנוס בהיותו מוטל בדרך והרי הוא יכול לעמוד. ואם לא היה לו לעמוד פטור ואע"פ שלא הזהיר לזה שנתקל בו מפני שהוא טרוד בנפשו:
9
When do we say that he is liable for the damages to the second [potter]? When he suffers damage to his body. If, however, his utensils are damaged, [the first potter] is not liable. For [an owner of] a cistern is not liable for the damage to utensils, and any obstacle is considered to be a derivative of a cistern, as explained above.16
ט
במה דברים אמורים שהוא חייב בנזקיו של שני כשהוזק גופו של שני אבל אם הוזקו כליו פטור שאינו חייב על הכלים בבור וכל תקלה תולדת בור הוא כמו שביארנו:
10
[The following rules apply when] potters, glass blowers and the like were walking one after the other, the first one tripped and fell, the second tripped over the first one, and the third tripped over the second. Each of them had time to stand up, but failed to do so. The first is liable for the damages to the body of the second, regardless of whether he was injured by the body of the first person who is lying on the earth,17 or he was injured by his burden.18 The second is liable for the injuries suffered by the body of the third person if he was injured by the second person's body. If, however, he was injured by the second person's burden, [the second person] is not liable. For he will say: "I did not dig this cistern - i.e., my burden." For it was the first person who caused the second person and his burden to fall.19 In all cases, [if the person who fell] warned [the person who tripped over him or his burden], [the person who fell] is not liable.
י
הקדרים והזגגים וכיוצא בהן שהיו מהלכין זה אחר זה ונתקל הראשון ונפל ונתקל השני בראשון והשלישי בשני וכל אחד מהן יש לו לעמוד ולא עמד. הראשון חייב בנזקי גופו של שני בין שהוזק בגופו של ראשון המוטל בארץ בין שהוזק במשאו.
11
If the first person fell and was lying lengthwise across the road and one person tripped over his head, another [tripped] over his legs and a third over his abdomen, he is liable for the injuries each suffered, for he had the potential to arise.
יא
נפל הראשון והיה מוטל לרוחב הדרך ונתקל אחד בראשו ואחד ברגליו ואחד בבטנו הרי הוא חייב בנזקי כולן הואיל והיה לו לעמוד ולא עמד:
12
When a person pours water into the public domain, and another person is injured by it, [the one who poured out the water] is liable for the damages.20 If the other person's garments were soiled, [the one who poured out the water] is not liable, as we have explained.21 If the water was absorbed by the earth, but the earth remained slippery,22 and a person slipped and fell and was injured by the ground, [the one who poured out the water] is liable.23
יב
השופך את המים ברשות הרבים והוזק בהן אחר חייב בנזקיו ואם נטנפו כליו פטור כמו שביארנו.
13
All those who open their sewage vats and rake out their cesspools do not have permission to pour this water into the public domain during the summer months.24 In the rainy season, a person has permission [to release such sewage].25Nevertheless, if a person or an animal is damaged by the water, the one who released it is responsible for the entire sum of the damages.26
יג
כל אלו שפותקין ביבותיהן וגורפין מערותיהן אין להן רשות לשפוך המים ברשות הרבים בימות החמה אבל בימות הגשמים יש להן רשות. ואעפ"כ אם הוזק אדם או בהמה במים חייבין נזק שלם:
14
A person should not take his straw and hay out to the public domain so that it will be trod upon and become fit to use as fertilizer. If he did take it out, our Sages penalized him and declared the straw to be ownerless. The first person to take possession of it acquires it as his own, once it has been trod upon and its value has increased.27 If a person took possession of it before that time - i.e., directly after it was taken out to the public domain - it should not be expropriated from him.28 Although the straw and the hay are ownerless, if [they cause damage to] a person or an animal, the person who brought it out [to the public domain] must compensate [for the damages].29
יד
לא יוציא אדם תבנו וקשו לרשות הרבים כדי שידושו ויעשו לו זבל. ואם הוציאו קנסוהו חכמים שיהיו כהפקר וכל הקודם בהן זכה מעת שנידושו והשביחו. ואם קדם אדם וזכה בהן משעת הוצאה לרשות הרבים אין מוציאין מידו. ואע"פ שהן כהפקר אם הוזק בהן אדם או בהמה הרי זה המוציא חייב לשלם:
15
A person may take out compost and manure to the public domain at a time when everyone does so and amass them there for 30 days so that they will be trodden upon by people and animals. Although [permission is granted], if these substances cause damage the owner is liable for the damages. [If another person takes] this manure,30 he is liable for theft. Since its value will not increase [appreciably] by being trodden upon, [our Sages] did not penalize him [by declaring it ownerless].31
טו
יש לכל אדם להוציא את הזבל והגללים לרשות הרבים בשעת הוצאת זבלים ולצבור אותן שם שלשים יום כדי שיהיה נשוף ברגלי אדם [ורגלי בהמה]. ואע"פ כן אם הזיק חייב לשלם. וחייבין על זה הגלל משום גזל כיון שאין בו שבח אם גדוש לא קנסו בו:
16
טז
אין שורין טיט ברשות הרבים ואין לובנים לבנים. אבל גובלין טיט ברשות הרבים אבל לא לבנים:
17
When a person constructs a building in the public domain, the one who brings stones may bring stones, and the one who builds may build. If any of them causes damage, they are obligated to pay for the entire sum of the damages.34
יז
הבונה ברשות הרבים המביא אבנים מביא והבונה בונה. וכולן א שהזיקו חייבין לשלם נזק שלם:
18
When a quarrier hews out a stone and gives it to a stonecutter, and it causes damage to a human or an animal, the stonecutter is liable. If the stonecutter gives it to a donkey-driver35 [and it causes damage], the donkey-driver is liable. If the donkey-driver gives it to a porter36 [and it causes damage], the porter is liable. If the porter gives it to a builder [and it causes damage], the builder is liable. If the builder gives it to the person who positions it on the building [and it causes damage], the latter is liable. If they were working as contractors [in a partnership], and after it was positioned in its place on the building it fell and caused damage, they all share in the liability.37 If they are hired laborers, the one [who positioned the stone in its place] is liable, and the others are not liable.38
יח
החוצב שחצב אבן ומסרה לסתת והוזק בה אדם או בהמה הסתת חייב. וסתת שמסר לחמר החמר חייב. מסר חמר לכתף הכתף חייב. מסר כתף לבונה הבונה חייב. מסרה הבונה לזה שמתקן ישיבתה בבנין המתקן חייב. ואם אחר שהעלוה על גבי הדימוס נפלה והזיקה והיו עושין בקבלנות כולן חייבין. ובשכירות האחרון חייב וכולן פטורין:
19
When a wall or a tree falls into the public domain and causes damage,39 the owner is not required to compensate [for the damages].40 [This applies] even when he declared [the tree or the wall] ownerless.41 [The rationale is that these entities] do not resemble a cistern, for at the outset, [it is not likely] that they will cause damage. If they were not sturdy, the court sets a time for the person by which he must cut down the tree and tear down the wall. How much time is granted him? Thirty days.42 If the tree or the wall falls within this time and causes damage, he is not liable. [If it falls] afterwards, he is liable, because he delayed [beyond the limits set].
יט
הכותל והאילן שנפלו לרשות הרבים [ד] והזיקו [ה] פטור מלשלם ואע"פ שהפקירן. לפי שאינן דומים לבור שהרי אין תחילתן להזיק. ואם היו רעועין בית דין קובעין לו זמן לקוץ את האילן ולסתור את הכותל וכמה הזמן שלשים יום. נפלו בתוך הזמן והזיקו פטור לאחר הזמן חייב מפני ששהה אותן:
20
When a person places thorns or glass [within a wall], or when a person makes a fence of thorns that project into the public domain, and it causes damage to another person,43 he is liable for the full extent of the damages. If he makes a fence of thorns that are contained within his property,44 he is not held liable, for it is not ordinary for people to rub against a wall [in the public domain].
כ
המצניע את הקוץ ואת הזכוכית והגודר גדרו בקוצים והפריח לרשות הרבים והוזק אחד בהן חייב נזק שלם. ואם גדר בקוצים בצמצום בתוך רשותו פטור לפי שאין דרך בני אדם להתחכך בכתלים:
21
[The following laws apply when] a person hid his thorns and [fragments of] glass in a wall belonging to a colleague, the owner of the wall came and tore down his wall into the public domain, and [the thorns or glass] caused damage. If the wall was shaky,45 the person who hid [the thorns or glass] is liable. If the wall was strong, its owner is liable.46
כא
המצניע קוציו וזכוכיותיו בתוך כותלו של חבירו ובא בעל הכותל וסתר את כותלו ונפל לרשות הרבים והזיק. אם כותל רעוע היה המצניע חייב. ואם כותל בריא הוא בעל הכותל חייב:
22
The pious men47 of the early generations would bury thorns and [fragments of] glass in their fields [at least] three handbreadths below the ground, so they would not be lifted up by a plow. Others would burn them in fire. Still others would throw them to the sea or to the river so that other people would not be injured by them.
כב
חסידים הראשונים היו מצניעין את הקוצים ואת הזכוכיות בתוך שדותיהם בעומק שלשה טפחים בארץ כדי שלא תעלם המחרישה. ואחרים שורפים [ו] אותם באש. ואחרים משליכים אותם לים או לנהר כדי שלא יוזק בהם אדם.
23
A person should not clear stones from his private property into the public domain.48 One should not dig a cavity, a cistern, a trench or a cave under the public domain.49 [This applies] even when [the covering of the cavity is so strong] that it can support a carriage laden with stones, for there is the possibility that [at a later date] it will open from below without his knowledge. It is permitted for a person to dig a cistern for the needs of people at large.50
כג
לא יסקל אדם מרשותו לרשות הרבים. ואין עושין חלל תחת רשות הרבים ג ולא בורות ולא שיחין ולא מערות ואע"פ שהעגלה יכולה להלך על גביהן והיא טעונה אבנים שמא תפחת מלמטה שלא מדעתו. והחופר בור ד לצרכי רבים מותר:
24
One should not build projections and balconies that protrude into the public domain unless it is possible for a camel and its rider51 to pass beneath, and provided it does not cast shadows on the people in the public domain. If he desires, he can withdraw the walls [of his building into his own domain] and build [the projection].52 If he did withdraw the walls [of his building], but has not built [a projection], he may do so at any time he desires. Never, however, may he return the walls to their original place. Once people at large have been granted permission to pass through a particular property, it cannot be withdrawn.53
כד
אין מוציאין זיזין וגזוזטראות לרשות הרבים אלא אם כן היו למעלה מגמל ורוכבו. [ז] והוא שלא יאפיל הדרך על בני רשות הרבים. ואם רצה כונס לתוך שלו ומוציאו. כנס ולא הוציא הרי זה מוציא כל זמן שירצה אבל אינו יכול להחזיר כותלים למקומן לעולם. שכל מיצר שהחזיקו בו רבים אסור [ח] לקלקלו:
25
When a person purchased a courtyard with projections and balconies protruding into the public domain, we operate under the presumption [that they were built legally].54 If the building falls, he is allowed to rebuild it according to its original proportions.
כה
לקח חצר ובה זיזין וגזוזטראות יוצאות לרשות הרבים הרי זו בחזקתה ואם נפלה חוזר ובונה אותה כשהיתה:
26
When [the foliage of] a tree leans into the public domain, it should be trimmed so that a camel and its rider can pass under it. An empty space should be left next to the banks on both sides of a river wide enough for the crewmen who descend and pull a boat.55 Any tree that is found in this space should be cut down immediately. A warning need not be given to its owner,56 for it blocks the crewmen from pulling ships.
כו
אילן שהוא נוטה לרשות הרבים קוצץ כדי שיהיה הגמל עובר ברוכבו. ומניחין מקום פנוי משתי שפתות הנהר כרחב כתפי המלחים שיורדין שם ומושכין הספינה. וכל אילן הנמצא ברוחב זה קוצצין אותו מיד ואין מתרין בבעליו שהרי מעכב מושכי הספינה:
27
[The following rules apply when] there was a path for people at large passing through a person's field, he expropriated the path and prepared a new path at the side of the field. What he granted them, they acquire possession of,57 but he does not acquire possession of [the land] he took. How wide is a path for people at large? Not less than sixteen cubits.58
כז
מי שהיתה דרך הרבים עוברת בתוך שדהו נטלה ונתנה להם מן הצד מה שנתן נתן וזכו בו וזה שנטל לא זכה בו. וכמה רוחב דרך הרבים אין פחות משש עשרה אמות:
FOOTNOTES
1.
Similarly, as stated in the following halachah, the owner of thecistern is not held liable if the utensils are damaged. With regard toa human, by contrast, the owner is liable for damages. (See Chapter12, Halachah 16; Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 410:21.)
2.
See Bava Kama 28b, 53b.
3.
See Chapter 12, Halachah 16.
4.
See the Tur (Choshen Mishpat 410), which defines thederivatives of a cistern as including any property that causesdamage in its place, which does not move. Although the Rambammentions a moving obstacle in Chapter 2, Halachah 19, the intentis that the obstacle is being moved by another force.
5.
The person stumbled on the earth, and this is what caused theinjury. Nevertheless, since the earth is ownerless, he collects thedamages from the person who left the obstacle in its place. Were itnot for the obstacle, the damage would not have taken place.
6.
If, however, he left a jug on his own property and then declared itownerless, he is not liable. At the outset, he had permission to leavethe jug there. See Chapter 12, Halachah 2.
7.
I.e. a place in front of oil vats or beehives, where jugs of oil orhoney would be filled.
8.
Although, as stated above, it is not the general practice forpeople to watch for obstacles as they walk, since jugs are often lefton the ground in places like these, a passerby should watch his step(Kessef Mishneh).
9.
In the dark, the owner of the jugs should have removed them beforenightfall, for he knows that a passerby will not be able to see. If hefilled the path with jugs, he made it likely that a person would breaka jug as he passed by.Note the quotation of this law in the Shulchan Aruch(Choshen Mishpat 412:2). There a further category is added: aninstance where a person places so many jugs in the road that it isimpossible for people to pass without breaking some of the jugs: thepasserby is not liable even if he intentionally broke enough jugs toallow him to pass.
10.
Since the jug broke accidentally, the owner is not considerednegligent with regard to the damages that were caused. For thisreason, the laws stated in Halachah 5 are not applied to him.
11.
If he did not have time to gather the shards before the otherperson was injured, he does not have such a moral obligation(Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 412:4.)
12.
For the camel, like the broken pitcher, fell accidentally as thepitcher broke, and is thus considered to be an obstacleunintentionally placed in the public domain. Bava Kama 29astates that this is speaking of an instance where the camel died, andits owner rescinded his ownership over its carcass. Otherwise, hewould be held liable.
13.
Halachah 1.
14.
I.e., his body is considered like an obstacle in the publicdomain.
15.
Although one might think that he could have been held liable fornot warning his colleague, this presumption is not accepted. Hisconcern for his own welfare takes priority. Rabbenu Asher (and hisopinion is accepted by the Tur and the Ramah ChoshenMishpat 413:1) differs and maintains that if the first potterhad the opportunity to warn the second and failed to do so, he isliable.
16.
Halachah 2. Implied by the Rambam's wording in this halachah (andthe following one) is that the body of the first potter is consideredto be an obstacle. He is not considered to have caused damage to hiscolleague with his person.
17.
This reflects the concept mentioned in the previous note. Aperson's body is considered to be an obstacle. Therefore, the Rambammentions damage to the body of the second person, implying that if thesecond person's utensils were damaged, the first would not be heldliable.
18.
From Halachah 7, it would appear that this ruling applies onlywhen the potter did not declare his wares ownerless. See the Ra'avad,the Maggid Mishneh, the Tur and the Ramah (ChoshenMishpat 413:2).
19.
This argument does not apply, however, with regard to injurycaused by the body of the second person. Since he had time to rise, heis liable for the injuries suffered.
20.
In this instance, there is no difference whether or not the persondeclared the water ownerless, as reflected in Halachot 2 and 7.
21.
For the owner of a derivative of a cistern is not liable fordamages to property (Halachot 1 and 2).
22.
The Ra'avad explains that this ruling applies only when the groundis still muddy because of the water. The Maggid Mishneh states that even when the water has been absorbed totally, if the ground is still slippery, the person is liable. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 412:5) appears to follow the Ra'avad's view.
23.
Although the ground did not belong to him, since the fall wascaused by the water that he poured, he is liable.
24.
During these months, the streets are clean and it is forbidden forsomeone to soil them. Moreover, in Eretz Yisrael it does notrain during these months, and the sewage will remain in the streetsfor months.
25.
For the streets are muddy at that time, and there is water flowingto wash away the sewage. Needless to say, as our sewage and sidewalkshave become more sophisticated, the relevance of these laws hasfaded.
26.
Although our Sages granted a person permission to release hissewage at this time, they did not absolve him of responsibility.
27.
There is an unresolved difference of opinion among the Sages(Bava Kama 30b) if the penalty takes effect from the time thestraw was taken out, or from the time it became useful asfertilizer.Note the Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 414:1), whostate that at the outset a person who asks whether he may take thestraw and the hay, should not be told that he may retain possession ofits initial value. Instead, he should be told that he may keep onlythe increment. After the fact, he is allowed to keep the initial valueas well.
28.
The Tur and the Ramah differ with regard to this point as well and maintain that in this instance, the straw should be expropriated from the person who took possession of it.
29.
Whenever damage is caused by an object that was declared ownerlessafter being placed in the public domain without permission, the personwho placed it there is liable.
30.
As stated in Hilchot Gezelah 6:5, this applies even if aperson takes his compost out at a time when it is forbidden to do so.A person who takes it is liable for theft.
31.
The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 414:2) statethat if the compost causes damage, it is considered to be ownerless,and it may be taken by another person.
32.
For these will remain in the public domain for an extendedperiod.
33.
To be used for building in the near future.
34.
In this instance as well, the license to perform an activity inthe public domain does not absolve a person of liability.
35.
To transport to a construction site.
36.
To carry it to the builder.
37.
If they were partners, once the task is completed they all sharein the responsibility. Until the entire task is completed, however,the person who is responsible for the activity at the time the damagewas caused must pay for the damages, even when they were allpartners.
38.
I.e., each person is liable for the portion of the task that heperforms.
39.
The Maggid Mishneh emphasizes that this applies when damageis caused by the tree or the wall as it falls. After it falls and thetree or the stones are lying in the public domain, the owner is notliable, if he declares them ownerless.
40.
This is considered an oness, a loss due to forces beyond hiscontrol. The Maggid Mishneh clarifies that this applies onlywhen the wall was constructed properly to begin with. When, however,it is built faultily, the owner is liable.
41.
Generally, despite the fact that a person declares an obstacle that he created in the public domain as ownerless, he is liable. In this instance, however,since he had permission to plant the tree or build the wall, and itfell because of forces beyond his control, he is not heldresponsible.The Maggid Mishneh explains that the owner is liable, if he desires toestablish his possession over the entities which fell.The Tur and the Ramah (loc. cit.) differ.
42.
As Bava Metzia 118a states, this is the ordinary timegranted by the court to adjust difficulties.
43.
The thorns or glass that projects is considered to be an obstacleplaced in the public domain.
44.
Even if they project beyond the wall itself, as long as they arecontained within the owner's property, he is not liable.
45.
And thus one could assume that it would be torn down in the nearfuture.
46.
The owner of the thorns or glass is not liable, because he had noreason to think that someone would tear down a sturdy wall. If thedamage was done when the wall was being destroyed, the owner of thewall is liable, because he should have taken care that no passersbywere hurt. If the damage was done after the wall was destroyed, theowner of the wall is liable, because he was responsible for clearingthe debris remaining from his wall (Tur, Beit Yosef, ChoshenMishpat 415).
47.
I.e., men who went beyond the measure of the law. This teaching isbased on the examples of sages cited by Bava Kama 30a.
48.
Lest another person stumble over them and be injured.
49.
The Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 417:1) states that in his era, ithad already become customary to dig below the streets of the publicdomain. This is surely the case in our age, when engineering hasprogressed to the point that safety is not compromised by digging inthis manner.
50.
E.g., to provide travelers with drinking water.This law is stated in a separate paragraph, because as is stated inthe Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat410:7, but see 417:1), it is a separate clause, and not a continuationof the previous idea. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch alsomention that the person must cover the cistern and entrust the coverto the trustees of the people at large, or at the very least informthe court that he has dug a cistern for people, but is expecting thecourt to arrange for its being covered.
51.
A camel was the highest popular means of conveyance in Talmudictimes. Needless to say, in every era, the height should be adjusted to fit the highest contemporary means of conveyance, e.g., in the present era, allowances should be made for semi-trailers.
52.
I.e., knock down the existing walls and build new walls furtherremoved from the public domain.
53.
If, however, people do not frequently walk through this space(e.g., the person prevented that by building a platform there), he mayrebuild the walls in their original place when he desires RabbenuYerucham; Beit Yosef, Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 417:2).
54.
I.e., that the person who originally constructed the buildingbuilt its walls removed from the public domain, so that theprotrusions and balconies were permitted.
55.
I.e., the rivers of Eretz Yisrael and Babylon were for themost part neither wide nor deep. When a ship wanted to dock, severalof its crewmen would descend and they would pull the ship to the riverbank by ropes. This halachah requires that enough empty space be leftalong the river banks to allow these crewmen to maneuver. FromHilchot Geneivah 8:2, it appears that we are speaking about fourcubits.
56.
This can be derived by the conduct of Rabbah bar Rav Nachman(Bava Metzia 108a), who cleared space without informing theowner of the property.
57.
See Halachah 24.
58.
This is derived from the width of the public thoroughfare in thecamp of the Jews in the desert.
Hilchot Nizkei Mamon - Chapter Fourteen
1
When a person kindles a fire in a field belonging to someone else1 and the fire spreads and causes damage, [the person who kindled it] is liable to pay the full extent of the damages,2 as [Exodus 22:5] states: "When a fire spreads through thorns and consumes bound or standing grain..., [the one who started the fire] must pay." Kindling a fire is considered one of the major categories of sources of damage.3
א
המדליק בתוך שדה חבירו ועברה הדליקה [והזיקה] חייב לשלם נזק שלם שנאמר כי תצא אש ומצאה קוצים ונאכל גדיש או הקמה וגו' שלם ישלם המבעיר וגו'. והבעירה מאבות נזיקין היא.
2
When a person kindles [a fire] on his own property, he must retreat a sufficient distance from his boundary to ensure that the fire will not spread to a field belonging to a colleague.4 How far must he move? Everything depends on the height of the fire.5 If he did not retreat an adequate distance and the fire spread and caused damage, he is liable to pay the full extent of the damages. If he retreated an appropriate distance, and [the fire] nevertheless spread and caused damage, he is not liable. This is considered an act of heaven. Similarly, if [the fire] crossed a stream6 or a pond of rainwater that was [at least] eight cubits wide, [the person who kindled the fire] is not liable.7
ב
הדליק בתוך רשותו צריך להרחיק מסוף המצר כדי שלא תעבור הדליקה לשדה חבירו. וכמה שיעור ההרחקה הכל לפי גובה הדליקה. [א] ואם לא הרחיק כראוי ועברה האש והזיקה חייב לשלם נזק שלם. הרחיק כראוי ועברה והזיקה פטור שזו מכה בידי שמים היא. וכן אם עברה נהר או שלולית שיש בהן מים ורחבן שמונה אמות פטור:
3
If the fire passed a wall, we measure the height of the wall and the height of the fire and the amount of foliage8 and bramble found there.9 If the fire was not of sufficient size to pass the wall ordinarily, he is not liable. If it is large enough, he is liable. When does the above apply? To a piercing flame].10 If, however, the flame ascends upward and warps downward because of the height of the flame, and there were trees11 there, we do not make an estimation. Even if the fire spread for 1000 cubits, [the person who kindled it] is liable.12
ג
עברה גדר אומדין גובה הגדר וגובה הדליקה והעצים או הקוצים המצויין שם אם אינה ראויה לעבור פטור ואם ראויה לעבור חייב. במה דברים אמורים באש [ב] הקודחת אבל אם היה לה להב גדול העולה ונכפף מגובה עליית הלהב והיו עצים מצויין שם אין לה אומד אלא אפילו עברה אלף אמה חייב.
4
[The following rules apply when] a fire breaks out in a person's domain,13 and his wall falls from causes other than the fire.14 If he had had the opportunity to rebuild the wall that fell, and he neglected to do so, he is liable. To what can the matter be compared?15 To a person's ox that broke loose16 and caused damage. For [the owner] was responsible for guarding him, and he failed to do so.
ד
נפלה דליקה בחצרו ונפל גדר שלא מחמת הדליקה ועברה הדליקה בחצר אחרת. אם היה יכול לגדור הגדר שנפל ולא גדרו חייב. למה הדבר דומה לשורו שיצא והזיק שהיה לו לשמרו ולא שמרו:
5
A person who sends a fire in the hands of a deaf mute, a mentally incompetent person or a child is not held liable by an earthly court;17 he does, however, have a moral and a spiritual obligation [to make restitution for the damages].18 When does the above apply? When he gave them a coal and they fanned it into a flame, for it is normal for a coal to burn out before it causes a flame. If, however, [the person] gave them a flame, he is liable, for his deeds caused the damage.19
ה
השולח את הבעירה ביד חרש שוטה וקטן פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בידי שמים. במה דברים אמורים שמסר להן גחלת וליבוה [ג] שדרך הגחלת להכבות מאליה קודם שתעבור ותדליק. אבל אם מסר להן שלהבת חייב שהרי מעשיו גרמו:
6
ו
שלח את הבעירה ביד פקח זה הפקח שהבעיר חייב לשלם והשולח פטור. וכן אם הניח שומר לשמור הבעירה השומר חייב:
7
When one person brings a flame, and [then] another person brings the wood, [and a fire is started, which causes damage], the person who brought the wood is liable.22 When one person brings the wood, and [then] another person brings a flame, [and a fire is started, which causes damage,] the person who brought the flame is liable.23 If another person comes and fans the fire, he is liable.24 If the fire is fanned by an uncommon wind,25none of them is held liable.26 If a person fanned a fire, but it was also fanned by the wind, the person is liable, for his [actions] caused damage.27 And whenever a person's [actions] cause damage, he is liable to pay for the full amount of the damages from the choicest property he owns, as if the damage was inflicted directly.
ז
8
When a fire spread and consumed wood, stone or earth,28[the person who kindled the fire] is obligated to make restitution, as it is written: "[When a fire] spreads through thorns [and consumes...] a field." [The following rules apply when] a fire consumes a grain heap or the like and there were utensils hidden in the grain heap. If [the utensils include] a thresher, a yoke for cattle or other articles that it is likely for farmers to hide in their grain heaps, [the person who kindled the fire] is liable.29 If [the utensils include] clothes, glassware and the like, he is not liable for the damage to the utensils.30
ח
אש שיצאה ואכלה עצים או אבנים או עפר חייב לשלם שנאמר ומצאה קוצים או השדה. אכלה גדיש וכיוצא בו והיו כלים טמונים בתוך הגדיש אם היו כגון מוריגים וכלי בקר וכיוצא בהן מדברים שדרך אנשי השדה לטמנם בגדיש חייב לשלם. היו בגדים וכלי זכוכית וכיוצא בהן פטור על הכלים:
9
When does the above apply? When a person kindles a fire in a field belonging to a colleague.31 If, however, he kindles the fire in his own [domain] and it spreads to a colleague's field, he is not liable for utensils hidden in a grain heap.32 He must, however, compensate [the owner] as if the space taken by the utensils had been filled with wheat or with barley.33
ט
במה דברים אמורים במדליק בתוך שדה חבירו אבל במדליק בתוך שלו ועברה לשדה חבירו פטור על כל הכלים הטמונים [ד] בגדיש אבל משלם הוא שיעור מקום הכלים ורואין אותו כאילו הוא מלא גדיש של חטים או של שעורים:
10
A person who kindles a fire in a field belonging to a colleague is also liable [in the following instance]. The fire spread and consumed a kid that was tied to the grain heap or a servant near the grain heap.34 For this is also the ordinary practice near a grain heap. If, however, the servant was tied [to the grain heap], or the goat was near the grain heap, [the person who kindled the fire is not liable].35
י
המדליק
11
When a person lends a colleague space to make a grain heap, the colleague makes that grain heap and hides utensils in it, and then the person who lent him the space burns the grain heap, [the person who kindled the fire] is liable to pay [his colleague] only for the grain heap.36 If he lent him space to make a heap of wheat and he made a heap of barley,37 or he lent him space to make a heap of barley and he made a heap of wheat,38 or he made a heap of wheat and covered it with barley,39or he made a heap of barley and covered it with wheat,40 [the person who kindled the fire] is not liable to pay any more than the value of a heap of barley.
יא
המשאיל מקום לחבירו והגדיש בו והטמין בו כלים והדליק המשאיל ושרף הגדיש אינו משלם אלא דמי גדיש בלבד. השאילו מקום להגדיש חטים והגדיש שעורים או להגדיש שעורים והגדיש חטים או שהגדיש חטים וחיפם בשעורים או שהגדיש שעורים וחיפם בחיטים אינו משלם לו אלא דמי שעורים בלבד:
12
When a person sets fire to a home belonging to a colleague, he must compensate for everything it contains,41 for it is the ordinary practice for people to keep all their utensils and possessions in their homes. The person whose house [was burned] is entitled to collect everything he claims,42provided he takes an oath while holding a [sacred] article.43 This oath is a Rabbinic institution, as will be explained.44 [The above applies] provided he claims articles that we can assume he owns45 or that it is customary for others to entrust to him.
יב
המדליק את הבירה של חבירו משלם כל מה שבתוכה. שכן דרך בני אדם להניח כל כליהם וכל חפציהם בבתים. וכל שיטעון בעל הבית הרי זה נשבע בנקיטת חפץ ונוטל. ושבועה זו מדברי סופרים כמו שיתבאר. ובלבד שיטעון דברים שהוא אמוד בהן או שהוא למוד להיות אותן הדברים שטען פקדון [ה] אצלו:
13
[The following rules apply when] a camel that is loaded with flax passes through the public domain, the flax that enters the shop46 is ignited by the lamp belonging to the shopkeeper and then sets fire to the entire building. The owner of the camel is liable, because he overloaded [his beast].47 [This applies regardless of] whether or not the animal stood.48 If the shopkeeper had placed his lamp outside, the shopkeeper is liable and must reimburse the camel driver even for the flax that burned, because he placed his lamp outside.49 [This applies] even with regard to a Chanukah lamp,50 for he should have sat [there] to guard it [from causing damage].
יג
גמל שהוא טעון פשתן ועובר ברשות הרבים ונכנס פשתנו לתוך החנות ודלקה בנרו של חנוני והדליק את כל הבירה בעל הגמל חייב מפני שהרבה במשאוי בין שעמדה הבהמה בין שלא עמדה. הניח החנוני נרו מבחוץ החנוני חייב אף בדמי פשתן מפני שהניח נרו מבחוץ ואפילו נר חנוכה היה לו לישב לשמור:
14
[The following rule applies when] a person bends standing grain belonging to a colleague toward a fire until it ignites. If the fire would not reach the grain unless it was spread by an uncommon wind, [the person who bent the grain] is not held liable by a mortal court.51 He does, however, have a moral and spiritual obligation to make reimbursement.52 When a person buries standing grain belonging to a colleague in earth or straw,53and then a fire passes and consumes it, the person who buried [the grain] is not held liable by a mortal court.54 He does, however, have a moral and spiritual obligation to make reimbursement, because the person who kindled the fire is not liable for [the destruction of property that was] hidden.55
יד
הכופף קמתו של חבירו לפני האש עד שתדלק אם אין האש מגעת לה אלא ברוח שאינה מצויה פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים. והטומן קמתו של חבירו בעפר או בתבן ועברה האש ואכלה אותה הרי הטומן פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים מפני שהמדליק את האש פטור על הטמון:
15
When a fire spreads and harms a human being and injures him, the person who kindled the fire is liable for the damages, unemployment benefits, medical costs, pain and embarrassment suffered by the injured party,56 as if he had personally injured him. Although fire is one of a person's possessions, it is as if he caused him damage with his arrows.57 If, by contrast, injury to a man is caused by a person's animal or cistern, he is liable for the damages alone, as we have explained.58
טו
אש שעברה והזיקה את האדם וחבלה בו הרי [ו] המבעיר חייב בנזקיו ובשבתו וברפויו ובצערו ובבשתו כאילו הזיקו בידו שאע"פ שאשו ממונו הוא הרי הוא כמו שהזיקה [ז] בחציו. אבל אם הזיקה בהמתו או בורו את האדם אינו חייב אלא בנזק בלבד כמו שביארנו:
16
[The laws pertaining to] all the derivatives of fire59are the same as [those pertaining to] fire itself. What is implied? If a person placed a stone, a knife or a burden on his roof, and it fell because of an ordinary wind and caused damage, he must pay the full extent of the damages. All these are derivatives of fire.60 If it was an uncommon wind that caused them to fall and create damage, he is not liable.61
טז
כל תולדות האש הרי הן כאש. כיצד הניח אבן או סכין או משא בראש גגו ונפלו ברוח מצויה והזיקו חייב לשלם נזק שלם שכל אלו וכיוצא בהן תולדות הבערה הן. ואם נפלו ברוח שאינה מצויה והזיקו פטור:
FOOTNOTES
1.
Without permission.
2.
This is considered as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah by Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandments 241) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 56).As the Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 418:2) pointout, this applies even when the person took the precautions mentionedin the following halachot. Since he kindled a fire on his colleague'sproperty without permission, he must bear the consequences.
3.
As the Rambam states in Halachah 16, a major category hasderivatives. The derivatives of fire are any asset that one owns thatis transported further by the wind and causes damage.
4.
This communicates a fundamental principle. Although he is actingwithin his own domain, a person must take the necessary precautions toensure that he will not cause damage to another person's property.
5.
I.e., the higher the fire, the further he must retreat.
6.
The Hebrew wording used by the Rambam leads to the inference that astream or irrigation ditch that is dried out is not considered to be asufficient fire barrier.
7.
For it is not usual for a fire to spread across a body of waterthat size.
8.
Or wood. The Hebrew term used by the Rambam could be translatedeither way. The intent is combustible fuel.
9.
Here too, the assessment is simple. The higher the flame, thehigher the fence must must be.
10.
We find this term in Deuteronomy 32:22: There is a piercingfire in My nostrils. From the commentary of Rabbenu Chanan'el(Bava Kama 61a), it appears that the intent is a very hot firethat burns powerfully, but does not produce a high flame.
11.
Or wood. The Hebrew term used by the Rambam could be translatedeither way. The intent is combustible fuel.
12.
When a flame is this high, there are no limits to the extent thefire may spread.
13.
I.e., he kindled a fire, and the flame flew out of control.
14.
Had the wall not fallen, it would ordinarily have been consideredsufficient to impede the spread of the fire. If the fire was so greatthat it toppled the wall, the person would be liable for the damagesthe fire caused. In the instance at hand, however, the question is: Ishe held responsible for the damages the fire caused, because he couldhave rebuilt the wall and thus prevented the fire from spreading.
15.
The comparison is taken from (Bava Kama 23a).
16.
I.e., the ox was placed in a corral that was not securely locked. (See Chapter 4, Halachah 1.)
17.
These three individuals are not liable, because their incompetencecauses them to be freed of responsibility for their conduct. Theperson who gave them the fire is not held liable, for he did not setthe fire himself.
18.
For he is an indirect cause of the damage.
19.
In this instance, he is considered a direct cause of thedamage.
20.
This follows the principle When a student's (the principal whocharged the agent with causing damage) words conflict with a master's(God's, who forbade causing damage), whose words should be heeded?Since the agent is mentally competent, he must accept responsibilityfor his conduct.
21.
When he accepted the responsibility to guard the fire, he alsoaccepted the liability if he failed to do so adequately. See Chapter4, Halachah 4 and notes.
22.
For were it not for the wood, the fire would not have spread.
23.
Since the wood was already there, it is the person who kindled thefire who must accept responsibility.
24.
Because it is the fanning that causes it to spread.
25.
If, however, such winds are common, the persons who brought thewood and started the fire must accept responsibility. They should havetaken this factor into consideration.Note Maggid Mishneh and the gloss of Sefer Me'iratEinayim 418:9, who explain that the term an uncommon winddoes not refer to a storm wind that rarely comes, but rather to a windthat is an infrequent and out-of-the-ordinary matter, but still asomewhat recurrent meteorological occurrence.
26.
For without the wind's influence, the fire would not havespread.If, however, the wind is blowing at the time a person is involvedwith the fire, and he ignores the possible danger, he is held liable(Maggid Mishneh; Ramah, Choshen Mishpat 418:9).The Ramah (based on the Tur) also maintains that if it is acommon wind that caused the fire to spread, the last person who hadanything to do with the fire is liable.
27.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's statements, maintaining thatthe liability of the person who fanned the fire is dependent on theviability of his deeds. Were his fanning sufficient to have caused thefire to spread even if it had not been fanned by the wind, he isliable. If not, he is not held liable.The Maggid Mishneh justifies the Rambam's ruling, citingseveral interpretations by the Sages in Bava Kama 60a. Henevertheless questions the Rambam's decision here, based on theRambam's own words in Hilchot Sh'chenim 11:1-2.The Kessef Mishneh resolves this difficulty, explaining thatin Hilchot Sh'chenim, the Rambam mentions a situation in which aperson winnows grain in his own domain, but the wind carries the chaffoutside his domain. There, even though an ordinary wind is involved,the person is not held liable. This appears to contradict the rulinghere. Nevertheless, as the Rambam himself states in HilchotSh'chenim, had it not been for the wind, the chaff would never havecaused damaged. In this instance, the person's fanning of the firewould have caused it to spread sufficiently to cause damage.
28.
Wood is consumed entirely by fire. Stone and earth are notconsumed entirely. Nevertheless, a fire might cause them todeteriorate until they are no longer useful (or as useful as they hadbeen). The liability for both these types of substances is alluded toin the verse the Rambam cites: Thorns are consumed entirely byflames (as are standing and bound grain, which the verse alsomentions). Why does the verse also mention a field (for the liabilityfor standing grain is mentioned explicitly)? To teach that even whenthe field is lying fallow, but its value deteriorates because it ischarred, the person is held liable. See Bava Kama 60a.
29.
Since it is the ordinary practice for such articles to be hiddenin a grain heap, the person who kindled the fire should haveconsidered this possibility. Therefore, he is liable for theirdestruction.
30.
Since it is abnormal for such articles to be hidden in a grainheap, the person who kindled the fire is not held liable. As stated inthe notes on the following halachah, the place taken by the utensilsis considered as if filled with grain, and restitution for that mustbe made.
31.
As in Halachah 1, since he kindled a fire in another person'sdomain without permission, stricter rules apply.
32.
Bava Kama 60a derives this law from the above verse, whichmentions standing grain. It comments: Just as standing grain isopenly revealed, so too, a person is liable only for entitiesthat are openly revealed.Note the Tur and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat418:13), which state that this applies in an instance where the firewould have been stopped by a wall, the wall fell for reasons notdependent on the fire, and the person had the opportunity to repairthe wall. Although he is liable for the grain heap, he is not liablefor the articles hidden in it.The rationale is: If the fire were large enough to spread byitself, the person would be liable. If its spread was caused byfactors not dependent on the person who kindled the fire - e.g., anabnormal wind - he is also not liable for the grain heap.
33.
I.e., if the utensils took up a cubic foot of space,the person who kindled the fire must pay for a cubic foot of grain. This also applies with regard to a person who burnsclothes or glassware hidden in a grain heap, as mentioned in theprevious halachah.
34.
The Rambam's words are based on the Mishnah (Bava Kama 6:7).The Maggid Mishneh states that the intent is that the person isliable only for the kid. Since the kid is tied, it cannot flee. He isnot liable for the servant, because the servant is mentally competentand should have fled.
35.
He is not held liable financially for the death of the servant,because he is considered to have murdered him, and is liable forcapital punishment for his death. Therefore, we follow the principlethat a person who is liable for capital punishment (even when thatsentence cannot be administered) is free of liability for monetaryloss.There is a question if he is liable for the loss of the kid in thisinstance even when a servant is not killed.. Some explain that he is not liable, because the kid should have fled. Others explain that a kid is not of sufficient mental competence to know whether or not to flee (Maggid Mishneh). Significantly, these laws are not mentioned by the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch.
36.
For he gave him permission to store grain in his domain, notutensils.
37.
Wheat is more valuable than barley. Nevertheless, since inactuality it was barley that was burned, the person who kindled thefire is liable only for the barley.
38.
In this instance, he is liable to pay him only for barley, becausethat is what he gave him permission to store.
39.
This applies even if he was granted permission to make a heap ofwheat. Since the person who kindled the fire saw only barley, he isliable only for that (Sefer Me'irat Einayim 418:20).
40.
If he gave him permission to make a heap of barley, he is liableto pay him only for the barley. If he gave him permission to make aheap of wheat, he is liable to pay the value of the wheat that wasactually burned, and the value of remainder of the barley (SeferMe'irat Einayim 418:21).
41.
I.e., all the personal goods the person claims.
42.
Note the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh, which states that whenit is supported by an oath, the claim of the house owner is accepted,not only when the person who kindled the fire is uncertain about thevalue of the articles in the home he destroyed, but even when heclaims to be certain that they were not worth the money the houseowner demands.
43.
A Torah scroll (Hilchot Sh'vuot 11:8). In certaincircumstances, tefillin are substituted for a Torah scroll(Ibid.:12).
44.
See Hilchot Chovel UMazik 7:17; Hilchot To'en V'Nit'an1:2. (See also Hilchot Sh'vuot 11:6.)
45.
I.e., that according to his standard of living, one might assumethat he owns.
46.
In that era, retail outlets were usually stalls in the publicdomain, rather than enclosed edifices. The flax protruded into thestall, where it caught fire from the shopkeeper's oil lamp.
47.
And caused the flax to protrude beyond the borders of the publicdomain and enter the confines of the shopkeeper's stall.
48.
If the animal stands still, there is more reason to hold the cameldriver liable, for once the fire was kindled, he should move his beastto prevent it from spreading the blaze. Nevertheless, even when hedoes keep his animal moving, since he caused the fire to start, he isliable for all the damages.
49.
This is considered an act of negligence on the part of theshopkeeper. For the camel drivers and wagon drivers in the publicdomain do not suspect that there are lamps hanging there.
50.
Which we are commanded to place at the outside of our homes.
51.
In and of themselves, the actions of the person who bent the grainwere not sufficient to cause the fire to reach the grain; theinfluence of the wind was also necessary. Since the fire was spread byan uncommon wind, it is considered a factor beyond the person'scontrol, and he is not liable.
52.
For had he not bent the grain, the fire would not have reached it,even though an uncommon wind was blowing. As mentioned in the notes onHalachah 7, if the uncommon wind was blowing at the time the personbent the grain toward the fire, he is liable.
53.
The two examples are carefully chosen. Earth reduces thelikelihood that the grain will be consumed by fire, while strawincreases it. Nevertheless, in either case the same laws apply.
54.
For he himself did not set the fire.
55.
See Halachot 8 and 9.
56.
See Hilchot Chovel UMazik, ch. 1, for a detailed explanationof these five categories of compensation.
57.
This is the subject of a difference of opinion among our Sages(Bava Kama 22a). Rabbi Yochanan maintains, as the Rambam rules,that kindling a fire is regarded like shooting an arrow. Resh Lakishdiffers and maintains that a fire is regarded no differently from aperson's cistern or his animals.To explain Rabbi Yochanan's opinion: When a person shoots an arrow,he is considered to have caused damage with his person although thedamage took place far from him. So too, when he kindles a fire,despite the fact that the damage occurs in a distant place, it is asif he caused the damage with his person.Note the Maggid Mishneh, who points to an apparentcontradiction in the Rambam's rulings. For Rabbi Yochanan does notfree a person of liability for articles that are buried. It is,however, possible to explain that the Rambam does not accept RabbiYochanan's perspective blindly. He accepts it in this instance, butfollows the other interpretations with regard to buried property.
58.
Chapter 11, Halachah 6, and Chapter 13, Halachah 2.
59.
The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 418:1) defines thederivatives of fire as referring to any property that one owns that istransported further by the wind and causes damage.
60.
For just as a person is liable when an ordinary wind spreads afire, so too, he is liable for any other damage his property causesthat comes as a result of an ordinary wind.
61.
Just as he is not liable when an uncommon wind causes a fire tospread (Halachah 7).
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
Sunday, Tammuz 1, 5777 · 25 June 2017
"Today's Day"
Sunday Tamuz 1, 2nd day of Rosh Chodesh 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Chukat, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 1-9.
Tanya: Ch. 9. In regard (p. 325) ...these ad infinitum. (p. 325).
Mesirat nefesh (self-sacrifice) for Torah-scholars means, "When a man dies in a tent,"1as interpreted by our sages,2 to "put to death" all pleasure-taking in worldly matters - for even trivial wordly delights are obstacles to being thoroughly devoted and dedicated to the "tent" of Torah.
FOOTNOTES
1. Bamidbar 19:14.
2. See Berachot 63b: "From whence do we know that Torah knowledge permanently remains only in an individual who gives his very life (as it were) for it? From the verse, When a man dies in a tent, i.e. he gives his very life to be in the "tent of Torah," renouncing all wordly pleasures.
• English Text | Video Class
Sunday, Tammuz 1, 5777 · 25 June 2017
"Today's Day"
Sunday Tamuz 1, 2nd day of Rosh Chodesh 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Chukat, first parsha with Rashi.
Tehillim: 1-9.
Tanya: Ch. 9. In regard (p. 325) ...these ad infinitum. (p. 325).
Mesirat nefesh (self-sacrifice) for Torah-scholars means, "When a man dies in a tent,"1as interpreted by our sages,2 to "put to death" all pleasure-taking in worldly matters - for even trivial wordly delights are obstacles to being thoroughly devoted and dedicated to the "tent" of Torah.
FOOTNOTES
1. Bamidbar 19:14.
2. See Berachot 63b: "From whence do we know that Torah knowledge permanently remains only in an individual who gives his very life (as it were) for it? From the verse, When a man dies in a tent, i.e. he gives his very life to be in the "tent of Torah," renouncing all wordly pleasures.
Daily Thought:
Free Buckets
Sometimes, not only the rain, but your buckets as well, are handed to you from above.
Sometimes it’s taken out of your hands to determine where you should go, what you should do and how it should be done. Sometimes you are Joseph, captured and tied to a destiny too great for you to fathom.
Sometimes you need to be quiet and just do what needs to be done. Do the best with whatever you’re given—honestly and earnestly. And put your confidence in your real Employer. [Likutei Sichot volume 18, page 293 ff; Derech Mitzvosecha, Taglachat Mtzora.]
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment