| |||||
- Chabad.org of New York, New York, United States - 
- ב"ה - Today in Judaism - Today is Monday, Av 29, 5777 · August 21, 2017Torah Reading:Shoftim: Deuteronomy 16:18 - 17:13
Deuteronomy 16:18 “You are to appoint judges and officers for all your gates [in the cities] Adonai your God is giving you, tribe by tribe; and they are to judge the people with righteous judgment. 19 You are not to distort justice or show favoritism, and you are not to accept a bribe, for a gift blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of even the upright. 20 Justice, only justice, you must pursue; so that you will live and inherit the land Adonai your God is giving you.
21 “You are not to plant any sort of tree as a sacred pole beside the altar of Adonai your God that you will make for yourselves. 22 Likewise, do not set up a standing-stone; Adonai your God hates such things.
17:1 “You are not to sacrifice to Adonai your God a cow or sheep that has a defect or anything wrong with it; that would be an abomination to Adonai your God.
2 “If there is found among you, within any of your gates [in any city] that Adonai your God gives you, a man or woman who does what Adonai your God sees as wicked, transgressing his covenant 3 by going and serving other gods and worshipping them, the sun, the moon, or anything in the sky — something I have forbidden — 4 and it is told to you, or you hear about it; then you are to investigate the matter diligently. If it is true, if it is confirmed that such detestable things are being done in Isra’el; 5 then you are to bring the man or woman who has done this wicked thing to your city gates, and stone that man or woman to death. 6 The death sentence is to be carried out only if there was testimony from two or three witnesses; he may not be sentenced to death on the testimony of only one witness. 7 The witnesses are to be the first to stone him to death; afterwards, all the people are to stone him. Thus you will put an end to this wickedness among you.
8 “If a case comes before you at your city gate which is too difficult for you to judge, concerning bloodshed, civil suit, personal injury or any other controversial issue; you are to get up, go to the place which Adonai your God will choose, 9 and appear before the cohanim, who are L’vi’im, and the judge in office at the time. Seek their opinion, and they will render a verdict for you. 10 You will then act according to what they have told you there in that place which Adonai will choose; you are to take care to act according to all their instructions. 11 In accordance with the Torah they teach you, you are to carry out the judgment they render, not turning aside to the right or the left from the verdict they declare to you. 12 Anyone presumptuous enough not to pay attention to the cohen appointed there to serve Adonai your God or to the judge — that person must die. Thus you will exterminate such wickedness from Isra’el — 13 all the people will hear about it and be afraid to continue acting presumptuously.
Today's Laws & Customs:
• Omit Tachanun in the AfternoonStarting in the afternoon, Tachanun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted.
Today in Jewish History:
• Flight from Liadi (1812)
On this date, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, who supported and aided the Czar's army during the Napoleonic wars, was forced to flee his hometown from Napoleon's forces which were advancing through White Russia in their push toward Moscow. After five months of wanderings he arrived in the town of Pyena. There he fell ill and, weakened by the tribulations of his flight and the harsh Russian winter, passed away on the 24th of Tevet, 5573 (1812).
Links: The Rebbe vs Napoleon
Daily Quote:
Today's Laws & Customs:
• Omit Tachanun in the AfternoonStarting in the afternoon, Tachanun (confession of sins) and similar prayers are omitted.
Today in Jewish History:
• Flight from Liadi (1812)
On this date, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, who supported and aided the Czar's army during the Napoleonic wars, was forced to flee his hometown from Napoleon's forces which were advancing through White Russia in their push toward Moscow. After five months of wanderings he arrived in the town of Pyena. There he fell ill and, weakened by the tribulations of his flight and the harsh Russian winter, passed away on the 24th of Tevet, 5573 (1812).
Links: The Rebbe vs Napoleon
Daily Quote:
I am asleep, but my heart is awake [Song of Songs 5:2]
Daily Torah Study:
Daily Torah Study:
Chumash: Shoftim, 2nd Portion Deuteronomy 17:14-17:20 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
• Hebrew text
• English text
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Monday, Menachem Av 29, 5777 · August 21, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 9
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
Like the preceding Epistle, the present one too centers on the theme of tzedakah.
If it is to be performed properly, tzedakah ought to be given unstintingly, and not only after all one’s own needs and desires have been satisfied. Ideally, it should be given in the spirit of an aphorism that was current among the chassidim of the Alter Rebbe:1 “Inside my slice of bread there is your share too; G‑d is providing for you through me.”
A man should thus feel obligated to share with others and provide for their needs to the very same degree that he provides for his own wife and children. Performing tzedakah in this manner can only be achieved when one distributes one’s earnings in an utterly selfless manner, doing so entirely for G‑d’s sake. Then, even when one provides for his own family’s needs he will do so because they are Jewish souls who are part of G‑d Above,2 and as such he bears a responsibility towards them.
When one acts in this way, he will realize that all needy folk are also Jewish souls and part of G‑d Above; he must therefore concern himself with their needs as well. Though the Torah rules that providing for one’s own wife and children takes precedence over providing for the needs of others, the essential sense of obligation remains the same.
אהוביי אחיי ורעיי אשר כנפשי
My beloved ones,3 my brethren and friends, who are unto me like my soul:
The previous Lubavitcher Rebbe explains in one of his talks, that when the Alter Rebbe seeks to imbue his followers with the love of their fellow Jews he addresses them as “my beloved friends,” for by befriending a fellow Jew one becomes a “beloved friend” of the Alter Rebbe.
Accordingly, it may be said that by heeding the Alter Rebbe’s instructions with regard to tzedakah one becomes one of the Alter Rebbe’s “beloved brethren.”
באתי כמזכיר ומעורר ישנים בתרדמת הבלי הבלים
I come [herewith] as one who reminds and awakens those who sleep the slumber of “vanities of vanities,”
Physical things at any time are deemed hevel: being airy and insubstantial, they have no true existence. When they serve no loftier purpose than themselves, they may be given the double epithet used above — havlei havalim,4 airy and foolish trivialities.
ולפקוח עיני העורים
and to open the eyes of the blind.
When the soul finds itself within the body and allows itself to be led by it, it resembles a sighted person whose eyes are bound, and who, intelligent though he may be, is then led about like an imbecile. If the soul, a part of G‑d Above, descends within a body but cannot restrict it from fulfilling its desires, it is considered to be blinded by the body, as the Tzemach Tzedek writes in Or HaTorah, at the conclusion of Parshat Behar.5 The “blindness” caused by the body must be healed, so that the soul may once again behold the truth.
יביטו לראות, להיות כל ישעם וחפצם ומגמתם, לכל בהם חיי רוחם
6Let them look and see to it that all their striving, longing and aiming, in7everything on which the life of their spirit depends,8 should be bound up
במקור מים חיים, חיי החיים
in9 “the [Divine] Source of the living waters,” the10 “Fountainhead of all life,”
כל ימי חייהם, מנפש ועד בשר
throughout all the days of their lives, with respect11 to the soul as well as to the flesh.
Not only during prayer or Torah study or while performing mitzvot is a Jew to be bound to G‑d, but even while going about his mundane affairs he should be attached to Him as well.
דהיינו, כל מילי דעלמא ועסקי פרנסה לא יהיה כאלו דעבדין לגרמייהו
I.e., in all mundane matters and in the means by which one earns one’s livelihood, one should not be like those who do everything for their own sake, acting only out of their desire to satisfy themselves and their families, rather than for G‑d’s sake.
ולא יהיה בית ישראל ככל הגוים
Let not the House of Israel be like all the gentiles,12
דזנין ומפרנסין ומוקרין לנשייהו ובנייהו מאהבה
who13 feed, provide for and esteem their wives and children out of [self-] love.
I.e., since one loves himself he also loves his wife and children, who are a part of him. Rather, his love should be holy in its selflessness.
כי מי כעמך ישראל גוי אחד בארץ, כתיב
For it is written:14 “Who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation on earth?”
דהיינו שגם בעניני ארץ לא יפרידו מאחד האמת, חס ושלום
This means that even in mundane (“earthly”) matters they will not, heaven forfend, separate15 [them] from G‑d’s true Unity,
The concept of the Unity of G‑d signifies that apart from Him nothing truly exists.
להעיד עדות שקר, חס ושלום, בקריאת שמע ערב ובוקר, בעינים סגורות
to bear false witness, heaven forfend, while reciting the Shema every evening and morning with closed eyes,
ה׳ אחד, בד׳ רוחות ובשמים ממעל ובארץ מתחת
[saying,]16 “G‑d is One” — in the four directions, and in the heavens above and on earth below,17 thus attesting to G‑d’s Unity even in the mundane realm,
ובפקוח עיני העורים
while as the eyes of the blind are opened, and here the Alter Rebbe addresses those whose eyes are blinded by corporeal matters:
התעיף עיניך בו ואיננו, חס ושלום
“Can you close your eyes upon Him, as if He is no more?”18 (heaven forfend).
This means to say that immediately upon opening his eyes after reciting the Shema, such a person can view the world as if it were a self-sufficient entity, separate and distinct from its Creator; accordingly, moreover, he conducts his affairs in a selfish manner rather than for the sake of heaven.
אך בזאת יאות לנו
Rather, this [approach] shall be befitting us —
להיות כל עסקינו במילי דעלמא לא לגרמייהו
that19 all our involvement with mundane affairs should be [conducted] not for its own sake,
כי אם להחיות נפשות, חלקי אלוה
but in order to animate souls, (i.e., to provide sustenance for fellow Jews, whose souls are veritably, so to speak,) portions of G‑d,
ולמלאות מחסוריהם בחסד חנם
and to supply what they lack, out of gratuitous kindness.
שבזה אנו מדמין הצורה ליוצרה, ה׳ אחד
In this way we make the form (the soul) resemble Him Who formed it, viz.,“G‑d [Who] is One”;
אשר חסד אל כל היום, חסד של אמת
for20 “the Chesed of G‑d endures throughout the day,” i.e., at all times — a21true Chesed, without thought of reward,
להחיות העולם ומלואו בכל רגע ורגע
that animates the universe and all that fills it, at every single moment.
In imitation of G‑d, Who thus dispenses kindness and ani-mates all created beings, man too should act kindly toward others and sustain those in need. Indeed, this should be his ultimate purpose when engaging in his work or in commerce: to be able to provide sustenance for the souls of his fellow Jews.
According to the above, however, one should provide for the needs of others to the very same degree that he provides for his own family. Why, then, should the needs of one’s own family take precedence over the needs of others? The Alter Rebbe answers this by saying:
רק שאשתו ובניו של אדם קודמין לכל, על פי התורה
It is only that according to the Torah22 a man’s wife and children take precedence over all others,
The Alter Rebbe wrote this Epistle in connection with the tzaddikim, R. Mendele Vitebsker and R. Avraham Kalisker, as well as their colleagues and disciples, who at the time of writing had already left the diaspora and were living in the Holy Land. The Alter Rebbe therefore goes on to say:
חוץ מצדיקים שבדור, שהן קודמין לבניו
except23 for the tzaddikim of the generation, who take precedence over one’s children;
וצדיקים שבארץ ישראל קודמין לצדיקים שבחוץ לארץ
moreover, the tzaddikim in the Land of Israel take precedence over the tzaddikim in the diaspora,
לבד מזאת שלא הניחו כמותם בחוץ לארץ
apart from the fact that they did not leave anyone in the diaspora comparable to themselves.
ודי למבין
This will suffice for the discerning.
FOOTNOTES
1. See Igrot Kodesh (Letters of the Previous Lubavitcher Rebbe), Vol. VIII, p. 606, and references cited there.
2. Likkutei Amarim, Part I, beginning of ch. 2.
3. Note of the Rebbe: “Cf. Iggeret HaKodesh, Epistles 16, 22 (Parts a & b), 24.”
4. Cf. Kohelet 1:2.
5. Or HaTorah, Vayikra, Vol. I, p. 191.
6. Cf. Yeshayahu 42:18.
7. This clause has been translated according to Rashi on Yeshayahu 38:16.
8. Note of the Rebbe: “See Part I, conclusion of ch. 31.”
9. Cf. Yirmeyahu 2:13.
10. Lit., “the Life of life.”
11. Cf. Yeshayahu 10:18.
12. The standard text of the Tanya has כעוע״ג (“like heathens”), which has been emended here according to its Luach HaTikkun (“Table of Corrections”).
13. The remainder of this sentence is paraphrased from the Ketubbah (the marriage contract), though the emphasis here, of course, is on a possibly selfish motivation.
14. I Divrei HaYamim 17:21.
15. V.L.: לא יפרדו (“they will not become separated”).
16. Devarim 6:4.
17. Cf. Beit Yosef, Orach Chayim, sec. 61, citing the Sefer Mitzvot Katan.
18. Cf. Mishlei 23:5.
19. V.L.: בהיות (“when all our involvement...is [conducted]”).
20. Tehillim 52:3.
21. Rashi on Bereishit 47:29.
22. See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, sec. 251, and references indicated there.
23. The passage beginning “Except for the tzadikkim...” and concluding “...for the discerning,” is added above to the standard printed text according to its Luach HaTikkun(“Table of Corrections”).
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Today's Mitzvah
Monday, Menachem Av 29, 5777 · August 21, 2017
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Mendel Kaplan Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Berel Bell Listen • MP3 Download
Positive Commandment 198
Taking Interest from a Gentile
"Take interest from the gentile"—Deuteronomy 23:21.
When issuing a loan to a non-Jew, we are commanded to charge interest. [This commandment only applies to a non-Jew who has not accepted upon himself the Seven Noahide Laws.] The Sages enacted various restrictions to this mitzvah [such as forbidding the charging of outright interest].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Deuteronomy Chapter 17
14When you come to the land the Lord, your God, is giving you, and you possess it and live therein, and you say, "I will set a king over myself, like all the nations around me," ידכִּֽי־תָבֹ֣א אֶל־הָאָ֗רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְהֹוָ֤ה אֱלֹהֶ֨יךָ֙ נֹתֵ֣ן לָ֔ךְ וִֽירִשְׁתָּ֖הּ וְיָשַׁ֣בְתָּה בָּ֑הּ וְאָֽמַרְתָּ֗ אָשִׂ֤ימָה עָלַי֙ מֶ֔לֶךְ כְּכָל־הַגּוֹיִ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר סְבִֽיבֹתָֽי:
15you shall set a king over you, one whom the Lord, your God, chooses; from among your brothers, you shall set a king over yourself; you shall not appoint a foreigner over yourself, one who is not your brother. טושׂ֣וֹם תָּשִׂ֤ים עָלֶ֨יךָ֙ מֶ֔לֶךְ אֲשֶׁ֥ר יִבְחַ֛ר יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ בּ֑וֹ מִקֶּ֣רֶב אַחֶ֗יךָ תָּשִׂ֤ים עָלֶ֨יךָ֙ מֶ֔לֶךְ לֹ֣א תוּכַ֗ל לָתֵ֤ת עָלֶ֨יךָ֙ אִ֣ישׁ נָכְרִ֔י אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹֽא־אָחִ֖יךָ הֽוּא:
16Only, he may not acquire many horses for himself, so that he will not bring the people back to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, for the Lord said to you, "You shall not return that way any more." טזרַק֘ לֹֽא־יַרְבֶּה־לּ֣וֹ סוּסִים֒ וְלֹֽא־יָשִׁ֤יב אֶת־הָעָם֙ מִצְרַ֔יְמָה לְמַ֖עַן הַרְבּ֣וֹת ס֑וּס וַֽיהֹוָה֙ אָמַ֣ר לָכֶ֔ם לֹ֣א תֹֽסִפ֗וּן לָשׁ֛וּב בַּדֶּ֥רֶךְ הַזֶּ֖ה עֽוֹד:
he may not acquire many horses for himself: But, only what he needs for his chariots, “so that he will not cause the people to return to Egypt” [to purchase the horses], because horses come from there, as it is said of Solomon (I Kings 10: 29), “And a chariot that went up and left Egypt sold for six hundred shekels of silver, and a horse for one hundred fifty.” - [San. 21b]
לא ירבה לו סוסים: אלא כדי מרכבתו, שלא ישיב את העם מצרימה, שהסוסים באים משם. כמה שנאמר בשלמה, ותעלה ותצא מרכבה ממצרים בשש מאות כסף וסוס בחמשים ומאה (מלכים א' י כט):
17And he shall not take many wives for himself, and his heart must not turn away, and he shall not acquire much silver and gold for himself. יזוְלֹ֤א יַרְבֶּה־לּוֹ֙ נָשִׁ֔ים וְלֹ֥א יָס֖וּר לְבָב֑וֹ וְכֶ֣סֶף וְזָהָ֔ב לֹ֥א יַרְבֶּה־לּ֖וֹ מְאֹֽד:
And he shall not take many wives for himself: Only eighteen, for we find that David had six wives, and it was told to him [by Nathan the prophet] (II Sam. 12:8):“and if this is too little, I would add for you like them and like them” [totaling eighteen]. — [San. 21a and Sifrei]
ולא ירבה לו נשים: אלא שמונה עשרה, שמצינו שהיו לו לדוד שש נשים, ונאמר לו ואם מעט ואוסיפה לך כהנה וכהנה (שמואל ב' יב ח):
and he shall not acquire much silver and gold for himself: However, he may have what is required to provide for his troops. — [San. 21b]
וכסף וזהב לא ירבה לו מאד: אלא כדי ליתן לאכסניא [לאפסניא]:
18And it will be, when he sits upon his royal throne, that he shall write for himself two copies of this Torah on a scroll from [that Torah which is] before the Levitic kohanim. יחוְהָיָ֣ה כְשִׁבְתּ֔וֹ עַ֖ל כִּסֵּ֣א מַמְלַכְתּ֑וֹ וְכָ֨תַב ל֜וֹ אֶת־מִשְׁנֵ֨ה הַתּוֹרָ֤ה הַזֹּאת֙ עַל־סֵ֔פֶר מִלִּפְנֵ֖י הַכֹּֽהֲנִ֥ים הַֽלְוִיִּֽם:
And it will be, when he sits [upon his royal throne]: If he does this, he merits that his kingdom will remain established. — [Sifrei]
והיה כשבתו: אם עשה כן כדאי הוא שתתקיים מלכותו:
two copies of this Torah-: Heb. מִשְׁנֵה הַתּוֹרָה i.e., two Torah scrolls, one that is placed in his treasury, and the other that comes and goes with him (San. 21b). [I.e., a small scroll, which the king carries with him. Thus the Talmud derives מִשְׁנֵה from שְׁנַיִם, two.] Onkelos, however, renders פַּתְשֶׁגֶן, copy. He interprets [the word] מִשְׁנֵה in the sense of repeating and uttering. [I.e., one copy of the Torah, which the scribe would write while uttering the words before he writes them, deriving מִשְׁנֵה from שִׁנּוּן, studying .]
את משנה התורה: שתי ספרי תורה. אחת שהיא מונחת בבית גנזיו ואחת שנכנסת ויוצאת עמו. ואונקלוס תרגם פתשגן, פתר משנה לשון שנון ודבור:
19And it shall be with him, and he shall read it all the days of his life, so that he may learn to fear the Lord, his God, to keep all the words of this Torah and these statutes, to perform them, יטוְהָֽיְתָ֣ה עִמּ֔וֹ וְקָ֥רָא ב֖וֹ כָּל־יְמֵ֣י חַיָּ֑יו לְמַ֣עַן יִלְמַ֗ד לְיִרְאָה֙ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהָ֔יו לִ֠שְׁמֹ֠ר אֶת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֞י הַתּוֹרָ֥ה הַזֹּ֛את וְאֶת־הַֽחֻקִּ֥ים הָאֵ֖לֶּה לַֽעֲשׂתָֽם:
the words of [this] Torah: [This is to be understood] according to its apparent meaning [namely a commandment written in the Torah].
דברי התורה: כמשמעו:
20so that his heart will not be haughty over his brothers, and so that he will not turn away from the commandment, either to the right or to the left, in order that he may prolong [his] days in his kingdom, he and his sons, among Israel. כלְבִלְתִּ֤י רֽוּם־לְבָבוֹ֙ מֵֽאֶחָ֔יו וּלְבִלְתִּ֛י ס֥וּר מִן־הַמִּצְוָ֖ה יָמִ֣ין וּשְׂמֹ֑אול לְמַ֩עַן֩ יַֽאֲרִ֨יךְ יָמִ֧ים עַל־מַמְלַכְתּ֛וֹ ה֥וּא וּבָנָ֖יו בְּקֶ֥רֶב יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:
and so that he will not turn away from the commandment: Not even from a minor commandment of a prophet.
ולבלתי סור מן המצוה: אפילו מצוה קלה של נביא:
in order that he may prolong [his] days [in his kingdom]: From this positive statement, one may understand the negative inference [i.e., if he does not fulfill the commandments, his kingdom will not endure]. And so we find in the case of Saul, that Samuel said to him, “Seven days shall you wait until I come to you to offer up burnt-offerings” (I Sam. 10:8), and it is stated, “And he waited seven days” (I Sam. 13:8), but Saul did not keep his promise and neglected to wait the entire [last] day. He had not quite finished sacrificing the burnt-offering, when Samuel arrived and said to him (I Sam 13:13-14),“You have acted foolishly; you have not kept [the commandment of the Lord your God, which He commanded you…] so now your kingdom will not continue” (I Sam 13:13-14). Thus we learn, that for [transgressing] a minor commandment of a prophet, he was punished.
למען יאריך ימים: מכלל הן אתה שומע לאו. וכן מצינו בשאול שאמר לו שמואל שבעת ימים תוחל עד בואי אליך (שמואל א' י, ח) להעלות עולות וכתיב ויוחל שבעת ימים (שמואל א' יג, ח) ולא שמר הבטחתו לשמור כל היום, ולא הספיק להעלות העולה עד שבא שמואל ואמר לו נסכלת לא שמרת וגו' ועתה ממלכתך לא תקום (שם יג ז - יד). הא למדת, שבשביל מצוה קלה של נביא נענש:
he and his sons: [This] tells [us] that if his son is worthy of becoming king, he is given preference over any [other] person. — [Hor. 11b]
הוא ובניו: מגיד שאם בנו הגון למלכות הוא קודם לכל אדם:
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 140 - 144• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 140
David composed this psalm against his slanderers, especially the chief conspirator Doeg. Anyone confronted by slanderers should recite this psalm.
1. For the Conductor, a psalm by David.
2. Rescue me from the evil man, protect me from the man of violence,
3. who devise evil schemes in their heart; every day they gather for wars.
4. They sharpen their tongues like a serpent; the spider's venom is forever under their lips.
5. Guard me, Lord, from the hands of the wicked, protect me from the man of violence-those who plot to cause my steps to slip.
6. Arrogant ones have hidden a snare for me, and ropes; they spread a net by my path, they set traps for me continually.
7. I said to the Lord, "You are my God!" Listen, O Lord, to the voice of my pleas.
8. God, my Lord, the strength of my deliverance, You sheltered my head on the day of armed battle.
9. Grant not, O Lord, the desires of the wicked; fulfill not his scheme, make it unattainable forever.
10. As for the head of my besiegers, let the deceit of their own lips bury them.
11. Let burning coals fall upon them; let it cast them down into the fire, into deep pits, never to rise again.
12. Let not the slanderous man be established in the land; let the evil of the man of violence trap him until he is overthrown.
13. I know that the Lord will execute judgement for the poor, justice for the needy.
14. Indeed, the righteous will extol Your Name; the upright will dwell in Your presence.
Chapter 141
This psalm teaches an important lesson: One should pray for Divine assistance that his mouth not speak that which is not in his heart. The gatekeeper only allows the gate to be opened for a purpose; let it be the same with one's lips.
1. A psalm by David. O Lord, I have called You, hasten to me; listen to my voice when I call to You.
2. Let my prayer be set forth as incense before You, the raising of my hands as an afternoon offering.
3. O Lord, place a guard for my mouth, keep watch over the door of my lips.
4. Do not incline my heart to a bad thing-to perform deeds in wickedness, with men, doers of evil; let me not partake of their delicacies.
5. Let the righteous one strike me with kindness and let him rebuke me; like the finest oil, let my head not refuse it. For as long [as I live], my prayer is [to preserve me] from their harm.
6. For their judges have slipped because of their [hearts of] rock, though they heard my words and they were pleasant.
7. As one who chops and splinters [wood] on the ground, so have our bones been scattered to the mouth of the grave.
8. For to You, God, my Lord, are my eyes; in You I take shelter; do not pour out my soul.
9. Protect me from the hands of the snare they laid for me, and from the traps of the evildoers.
10. Let the wicked fall into their own nets together, until I pass over.
Chapter 142
David composed this psalm while hiding from Saul in a cave, at which time he had cut off the corner of Saul's garment (to prove that he was able to kill him but did not wish to do so). He declared, "Where can I turn, and where can I run? All I have is to cry out to You!"
1. A maskil1 by David, when he was in the cave, a prayer.
2. With my voice I will cry out to the Lord; with my voice I will call to the Lord in supplication.
3. I will pour out my plea before Him; I will declare my distress in His presence.
4. When my spirit is faint within me, You know my path. In the way in which I walk, they have hidden a snare for me.
5. Look to my right and see, there is none that will know me; every escape is lost to me. No man cares for my soul.
6. I cried out to You, O Lord; I said, "You are my refuge, my portion in the land of the living.”
7. Listen to my song of prayer, for I have been brought very low. Deliver me from my pursuers, for they are too mighty for me.
8. Release my soul from confinement, so that it may acknowledge Your Name. Because of me, the righteous will crown [You] when You will deal graciously with me.
FOOTNOTES
1.A psalm intended to enlighten and impart knowledge(Metzudot).
Chapter 143
1. A psalm by David. O Lord, hear my prayer, lend Your ear to my supplications. With Your faithfulness answer me, and with Your righteousness.
2. Do not enter into judgment with Your servant, for no living being would be vindicated before You.
3. For the enemy has pursued my soul; he has crushed my life to the ground; he has set me down in dark places, like those who are eternally dead.
4. Then my spirit became faint within me; my heart was dismayed within me.
5. I remembered the days of old; I meditated on all Your deeds; I spoke of Your handiwork.
6. I spread out my hands to You; like a languishing land my soul yearns after You, Selah.
7. Answer me soon, O Lord, my spirit is spent; hide not Your face from me, lest I become like those who descend into the pit.
8. Let me hear Your kindness in the morning, for have I trusted in You. Let me know the way in which I should walk, for to You I have lifted my soul.
9. Deliver me from my enemies, O Lord. I have concealed [my troubles from all, save] You.
10. Teach me to do Your will, for You are my God. Let Your good spirit lead me in an even path.
11. For the sake of Your Name, O Lord, give me life; in Your righteousness, take my soul out of distress.
12. And in Your kindness, cut off my enemies and obliterate all those who oppress my soul, for I am Your servant.
Chapter 144
After triumphing in all his wars, David composed this psalm in praise of God.
1. By David. Blessed be the Lord, my Rock, Who trains my hands for battle and my fingers for war.
2. My source of kindness and my fortress, my high tower and my rescuer, my shield, in Whom I take refuge; it is He Who makes my people submit to me.
3. O Lord, what is man that You have recognized him; the son of a mortal, that You are mindful of him?
4. Man is like a breath; his days are like a passing shadow.
5. O Lord, incline Your heavens and descend; touch the mountains and they will become vapor.
6. Flash one bolt of lightning and You will scatter them; send out Your arrows and You will confound them.
7. Stretch forth Your hands from on high, rescue me and deliver me out of many waters, from the hand of strangers,
8. whose mouth speaks deceit and whose right hand is a right hand of falsehood.
9. God, I will sing a new song to You, I will play to You upon a harp of ten strings.
10. He who gives victory to kings, He will rescue David, His servant, from the evil sword.
11. Rescue me and deliver me from the hand of strangers, whose mouth speaks deceit and whose right hand is a right hand of falsehood.
12. For our sons are like plants, brought up to manliness in their youth; our daughters are like cornerstones, fashioned after the fashion of a palace.
13. Our storehouses are full, overflowing with all manner of food; our sheep increase by the thousands, growing by the tens of thousands in our open fields.
14. Our leaders bear the heaviest burden; there is none who break through, nor is there bad report, nor outcry in our streets.
15. Happy is the nation for whom this is so. Happy is that nation whose God is the Lord.
Tanya: Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 9• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Monday, Menachem Av 29, 5777 · August 21, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Iggeret HaKodesh, beginning of Epistle 9
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
Like the preceding Epistle, the present one too centers on the theme of tzedakah.
If it is to be performed properly, tzedakah ought to be given unstintingly, and not only after all one’s own needs and desires have been satisfied. Ideally, it should be given in the spirit of an aphorism that was current among the chassidim of the Alter Rebbe:1 “Inside my slice of bread there is your share too; G‑d is providing for you through me.”
A man should thus feel obligated to share with others and provide for their needs to the very same degree that he provides for his own wife and children. Performing tzedakah in this manner can only be achieved when one distributes one’s earnings in an utterly selfless manner, doing so entirely for G‑d’s sake. Then, even when one provides for his own family’s needs he will do so because they are Jewish souls who are part of G‑d Above,2 and as such he bears a responsibility towards them.
When one acts in this way, he will realize that all needy folk are also Jewish souls and part of G‑d Above; he must therefore concern himself with their needs as well. Though the Torah rules that providing for one’s own wife and children takes precedence over providing for the needs of others, the essential sense of obligation remains the same.
אהוביי אחיי ורעיי אשר כנפשי
My beloved ones,3 my brethren and friends, who are unto me like my soul:
The previous Lubavitcher Rebbe explains in one of his talks, that when the Alter Rebbe seeks to imbue his followers with the love of their fellow Jews he addresses them as “my beloved friends,” for by befriending a fellow Jew one becomes a “beloved friend” of the Alter Rebbe.
Accordingly, it may be said that by heeding the Alter Rebbe’s instructions with regard to tzedakah one becomes one of the Alter Rebbe’s “beloved brethren.”
באתי כמזכיר ומעורר ישנים בתרדמת הבלי הבלים
I come [herewith] as one who reminds and awakens those who sleep the slumber of “vanities of vanities,”
Physical things at any time are deemed hevel: being airy and insubstantial, they have no true existence. When they serve no loftier purpose than themselves, they may be given the double epithet used above — havlei havalim,4 airy and foolish trivialities.
ולפקוח עיני העורים
and to open the eyes of the blind.
When the soul finds itself within the body and allows itself to be led by it, it resembles a sighted person whose eyes are bound, and who, intelligent though he may be, is then led about like an imbecile. If the soul, a part of G‑d Above, descends within a body but cannot restrict it from fulfilling its desires, it is considered to be blinded by the body, as the Tzemach Tzedek writes in Or HaTorah, at the conclusion of Parshat Behar.5 The “blindness” caused by the body must be healed, so that the soul may once again behold the truth.
יביטו לראות, להיות כל ישעם וחפצם ומגמתם, לכל בהם חיי רוחם
6Let them look and see to it that all their striving, longing and aiming, in7everything on which the life of their spirit depends,8 should be bound up
במקור מים חיים, חיי החיים
in9 “the [Divine] Source of the living waters,” the10 “Fountainhead of all life,”
כל ימי חייהם, מנפש ועד בשר
throughout all the days of their lives, with respect11 to the soul as well as to the flesh.
Not only during prayer or Torah study or while performing mitzvot is a Jew to be bound to G‑d, but even while going about his mundane affairs he should be attached to Him as well.
דהיינו, כל מילי דעלמא ועסקי פרנסה לא יהיה כאלו דעבדין לגרמייהו
I.e., in all mundane matters and in the means by which one earns one’s livelihood, one should not be like those who do everything for their own sake, acting only out of their desire to satisfy themselves and their families, rather than for G‑d’s sake.
ולא יהיה בית ישראל ככל הגוים
Let not the House of Israel be like all the gentiles,12
דזנין ומפרנסין ומוקרין לנשייהו ובנייהו מאהבה
who13 feed, provide for and esteem their wives and children out of [self-] love.
I.e., since one loves himself he also loves his wife and children, who are a part of him. Rather, his love should be holy in its selflessness.
כי מי כעמך ישראל גוי אחד בארץ, כתיב
For it is written:14 “Who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation on earth?”
דהיינו שגם בעניני ארץ לא יפרידו מאחד האמת, חס ושלום
This means that even in mundane (“earthly”) matters they will not, heaven forfend, separate15 [them] from G‑d’s true Unity,
The concept of the Unity of G‑d signifies that apart from Him nothing truly exists.
להעיד עדות שקר, חס ושלום, בקריאת שמע ערב ובוקר, בעינים סגורות
to bear false witness, heaven forfend, while reciting the Shema every evening and morning with closed eyes,
ה׳ אחד, בד׳ רוחות ובשמים ממעל ובארץ מתחת
[saying,]16 “G‑d is One” — in the four directions, and in the heavens above and on earth below,17 thus attesting to G‑d’s Unity even in the mundane realm,
ובפקוח עיני העורים
while as the eyes of the blind are opened, and here the Alter Rebbe addresses those whose eyes are blinded by corporeal matters:
התעיף עיניך בו ואיננו, חס ושלום
“Can you close your eyes upon Him, as if He is no more?”18 (heaven forfend).
This means to say that immediately upon opening his eyes after reciting the Shema, such a person can view the world as if it were a self-sufficient entity, separate and distinct from its Creator; accordingly, moreover, he conducts his affairs in a selfish manner rather than for the sake of heaven.
אך בזאת יאות לנו
Rather, this [approach] shall be befitting us —
להיות כל עסקינו במילי דעלמא לא לגרמייהו
that19 all our involvement with mundane affairs should be [conducted] not for its own sake,
כי אם להחיות נפשות, חלקי אלוה
but in order to animate souls, (i.e., to provide sustenance for fellow Jews, whose souls are veritably, so to speak,) portions of G‑d,
ולמלאות מחסוריהם בחסד חנם
and to supply what they lack, out of gratuitous kindness.
שבזה אנו מדמין הצורה ליוצרה, ה׳ אחד
In this way we make the form (the soul) resemble Him Who formed it, viz.,“G‑d [Who] is One”;
אשר חסד אל כל היום, חסד של אמת
for20 “the Chesed of G‑d endures throughout the day,” i.e., at all times — a21true Chesed, without thought of reward,
להחיות העולם ומלואו בכל רגע ורגע
that animates the universe and all that fills it, at every single moment.
In imitation of G‑d, Who thus dispenses kindness and ani-mates all created beings, man too should act kindly toward others and sustain those in need. Indeed, this should be his ultimate purpose when engaging in his work or in commerce: to be able to provide sustenance for the souls of his fellow Jews.
According to the above, however, one should provide for the needs of others to the very same degree that he provides for his own family. Why, then, should the needs of one’s own family take precedence over the needs of others? The Alter Rebbe answers this by saying:
רק שאשתו ובניו של אדם קודמין לכל, על פי התורה
It is only that according to the Torah22 a man’s wife and children take precedence over all others,
The Alter Rebbe wrote this Epistle in connection with the tzaddikim, R. Mendele Vitebsker and R. Avraham Kalisker, as well as their colleagues and disciples, who at the time of writing had already left the diaspora and were living in the Holy Land. The Alter Rebbe therefore goes on to say:
חוץ מצדיקים שבדור, שהן קודמין לבניו
except23 for the tzaddikim of the generation, who take precedence over one’s children;
וצדיקים שבארץ ישראל קודמין לצדיקים שבחוץ לארץ
moreover, the tzaddikim in the Land of Israel take precedence over the tzaddikim in the diaspora,
לבד מזאת שלא הניחו כמותם בחוץ לארץ
apart from the fact that they did not leave anyone in the diaspora comparable to themselves.
ודי למבין
This will suffice for the discerning.
FOOTNOTES
1. See Igrot Kodesh (Letters of the Previous Lubavitcher Rebbe), Vol. VIII, p. 606, and references cited there.
2. Likkutei Amarim, Part I, beginning of ch. 2.
3. Note of the Rebbe: “Cf. Iggeret HaKodesh, Epistles 16, 22 (Parts a & b), 24.”
4. Cf. Kohelet 1:2.
5. Or HaTorah, Vayikra, Vol. I, p. 191.
6. Cf. Yeshayahu 42:18.
7. This clause has been translated according to Rashi on Yeshayahu 38:16.
8. Note of the Rebbe: “See Part I, conclusion of ch. 31.”
9. Cf. Yirmeyahu 2:13.
10. Lit., “the Life of life.”
11. Cf. Yeshayahu 10:18.
12. The standard text of the Tanya has כעוע״ג (“like heathens”), which has been emended here according to its Luach HaTikkun (“Table of Corrections”).
13. The remainder of this sentence is paraphrased from the Ketubbah (the marriage contract), though the emphasis here, of course, is on a possibly selfish motivation.
14. I Divrei HaYamim 17:21.
15. V.L.: לא יפרדו (“they will not become separated”).
16. Devarim 6:4.
17. Cf. Beit Yosef, Orach Chayim, sec. 61, citing the Sefer Mitzvot Katan.
18. Cf. Mishlei 23:5.
19. V.L.: בהיות (“when all our involvement...is [conducted]”).
20. Tehillim 52:3.
21. Rashi on Bereishit 47:29.
22. See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, sec. 251, and references indicated there.
23. The passage beginning “Except for the tzadikkim...” and concluding “...for the discerning,” is added above to the standard printed text according to its Luach HaTikkun(“Table of Corrections”).
Rambam:
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassToday's Mitzvah
Monday, Menachem Av 29, 5777 · August 21, 2017
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Mendel Kaplan Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Berel Bell Listen • MP3 Download
Positive Commandment 198
Taking Interest from a Gentile
"Take interest from the gentile"—Deuteronomy 23:21.
When issuing a loan to a non-Jew, we are commanded to charge interest. [This commandment only applies to a non-Jew who has not accepted upon himself the Seven Noahide Laws.] The Sages enacted various restrictions to this mitzvah [such as forbidding the charging of outright interest].
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Taking Interest from a Gentile
Positive Commandment 198
Translated by Berel Bell
The 198th mitzvah is that we are commanded1 to charge interest to a non-Jew and only then lend him money, in order that we not assist him nor give him rest. Rather we should cause him [financial] loss, even with the kind of interest that we are forbidden from taking from a Jew.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He), "You shall take interest from a non-Jew." The Oral Tradition explains that this does not only give permission, but is a command, as stated in the Sifri: "The phrase 'You shall take interest from a non-Jew' constitutes a positive commandment. The phrase 'You shall not take interest from your brother' constitutes a prohibition."
This commandment also has rabbinically ordained conditions, as explained in tractate Bava Metzia.3
FOOTNOTES
1.See Kapach, 5731, footnote 14 regarding all the authorities who say that this is not a commandment. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 12, p. 115ff.
2.Deut. 23:21.
3.See 70b: "R. Chiya the son of R. Huna said, 'You are only allowed to take the minimum necessary to survive.' " See Kapach, 5731, footnote 16.
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter A Day: Edut Edut - Chapter 19
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Rambam:English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Edut - Chapter 19
1
The following rules apply when two witnesses testify, saying: "So-and-so murdered a person in the eastern portion of the hall at this-and-this time," two other witnesses came and said: "You were together with us in the western portion of the hall at that time." If a person standing in the western portion could see what transpires in the eastern portion, they are not disqualified through hazamah. If, however, it is impossible to see what transpires, they are disqualified through hazamah. We do not say perhaps the eyesight of the first pair is very powerful and they can see things which transpire at a greater distance than all other men.
Similar principles apply if two people testified saying: "In the morning, so-and-so committed murder in Jerusalem," and two others come and tell them: "On that day, in the evening, you were together with us in Lod." If it is possible for a person to travel, even on horseback, from Jerusalem to Lod from the morning to the evening, they are not disqualified through hazamah. If not, they are disqualified through hazamah. We do not say perhaps they found a speedy camel and were able to travel the route faster than usual. Instead, we always calculate the matter using according to the known standards and disqualify them through hazamah.
א
שנים שהעידו ואמרו במזרח הבירה הרג זה את הנפש בשעה פלונית ובאו שנים ואמרו להן במערב הבירה הזאת הייתם עמנו בעת הזאת אם יכול העומד במערב לראות מה שבמזרח אינן זוממין ואם אינו יכול לראות הרי אלו זוממין ואין אומרין שמא מאור עיניהם של ראשונים רב ורואין מרחוק יתר מכל אדם וכן אם העידו שנים ואמרו בבקר הרג זה את הנפש בירושלים ובאו שנים ואמרו להן ביום זה בערב הייתם עמנו בלוד אם יכול אדם להלך אפילו על הסוס מירושלים ללוד מבקר עד ערב אינן זוממין ואם לאו הרי אלו זוממין ואין אומרין שמא כר קל ביותר נזדמן להן וקפלו את הדרך אלא בדבר המצוי הידוע לכל משערין לעולם ומזימין אותן:
2
The following rules apply when two witnesses state: "On Sunday, so-and-so murdered a person in this-and-this place," and two other witnesses came and said: "On that date, you were together with us in another far removed place, but so-and-so certainly murdered the victim on the following day," the murderer and the first pair of witnesses are executed. Even if the second pair of witnesses testify that he committed the murder several days previously,the above laws apply. The rationale is that at the time they delivered testimony, the murderer had not yet been sentenced to death.
If, however, two witnesses come on Tuesday, and say: "On Sunday, so-and-so was sentenced to death," and two others come on Tuesday and say: "On Sunday, you were together with us in this distant place, but so-and-so was sentenced to death on Friday or on Monday," these witnesses are not executed. The rationale is that at the time they testified, the person had already been sentenced to death.
Similar principles apply with regard to the payment of a fine. What is implied? Two people came on Tuesday and said: "On Sunday, so-and-so stole, slaughtered the animal he stole, and was sentenced to pay a fine of four or five times the animal's worth." Two other witnesses come and testify: "On Sunday, you were with us in a distant place, but he was sentenced on Friday" - or even if they said: "On Sunday, so-and-so stole, slaughtered the animal he stole, and was sentenced on Monday," the witnesses who were disqualified through hazamah are not required to make financial restitution. The rationale is that at the time they testified against him, the defendant was obligated to make financial restitution. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
ב
שנים שאמרו באחד בשבת הרג זה את הנפש במקום פלוני ובאו שנים ואמרו ביום זה עמנו הייתם במקום אחר רחוק אבל ביום שלאחר יום זה הרגו בודאי אפילו העידו האחרונים שקודם כמה ימים הרגו הרי זה ההורג עם עדיו הראשונים נהרגין שהרי הוזמו שבעת שהעידו שהרג עדיין לא נגמר דינו ליהרג אבל באו שני עדים בשלישי בשבת ואמרו באחד בשבת נגמר דינו של פלוני להריגה ובאו שנים ואמרו באחד בשבת עמנו הייתם במקום פלוני הרחוק אלא מערב שבת או בשני בשבת נגמר דינו אין עדים אלו שהוזמו נהרגין שהרי מכל מקום בעת שהעידו עליו כבר נגמר דינו להריגה וכן לענין תשלומי קנס כיצד באו שנים בשלישי בשבת ואמרו באחד בשבת גנב וטבח ונגמר דינו ובאו שנים ואמרו באחד בשבת עמנו הייתם במקום רחוק אבל בערב שבת נגמר דינו אפילו אמרו [באחד] בשבת גנב וטבח ומכר ובשני בשבת נגמר דינו אין עדים אלו שהוזמו משלמין שהרי מכל מקום בעת שהעידו עליו חייב היה לשלם וכן כל כיוצא בזה:
3
The witnesses to a legal document may not be disqualified through hazamah unless they testify in court, saying: "We composed the legal document at the time stated. We did not delay the dating of it." If they did not say this, even though a document composed in Jerusalem is dated the first of Nisan and witnesses come and testify that the witnesses to the legal document were in Babylon on that date, the legal document is acceptable and the witnesses are acceptable. For it is possible that they composed the legal document and postdated it, i.e., they were in Jerusalem on the first of Adar and composed the legal document and postdated it, dating it the first of Nisan.
The following rules apply when, by contrast, they said: "We signed the document on the date stated," and they were disqualified through hazamah. If there are witnesses who know the day they signed the legal document or witnesses saw the legal document with their signatures on it on this-and-this date, once they are disqualified through hazamah, they are disqualified retroactively from the date on which it is known that they signed the legal document. The rationale is that witnesses who sign a legal document are considered as if their testimony was delivered in court from the time they signed.
If, however, there are no witnesses who saw them sign, giving testimony, nor did any see the signed document beforehand, the witnesses are disqualified only from the time they testified in court that the signature was theirs, saying: "We signed it on that date." The rationale is that it is possible that on the date that they testified in court, they signed a legal document that had existed for many years and they lied by saying: "We signed it on the day it was dated."
ג
אין עדי השטר נעשין זוממין עד שיאמרו בבית דין שטר זה בזמנו כתבנוהו ולא אחרנוהו אבל אם לא אמרו כן אע"פ שזמנו של שטר באחד בניסן בירושלים ובאו עדים והעידו שעדי השטר היו עמהם בבבל ביום זה השטר כשר והעדים כשרים שאפשר שכתבוהו ואחרוהו וכשהיו בירושלים באחד באדר כתבו שטר זה שם ואחרו זמנו וכתבו זמנו בניסן אמרו בזמנו כתבנוהו והוזמו אם יש שם עדים שיודעים היום שחתמו על השטר או עדים שראו זה השטר וחתימת ידם בו ביום פלוני כיון שהוזמו הרי נפסלו למפרע מיום שנודע שחתמו על השטר שהעדים החתומים על השטר הרי הן כמי שנחקרה עדותן בבית דין בעת החתימה אבל אם אין עדים שראו עדותן ולא ראו השטר מקודם אין נפסלין אלא מעת שהעידו בבית דין שזה כתב ידן ואמרו בזמנו כתבנוהו ואפשר שביום זה שהעידו בבית דין בו ביום חתמו על השטר שיש לו כמה שנים והם שקרו ואמרו בזמנו כתבנו:
• 3 Chapters A Day: Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 25, Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 26, Malveh veLoveh Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 27
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video Class
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 25
1
The following law applies when a person gives a loan to a colleague and afterwards, a third party says: "I will act as a guarantor," the lender sues the borrower and a third party says: "Let him go. I will act as a guarantor, or the lender was strangling the borrower in the market place and a third party says: "Let him go. I will act as a guarantor." The guarantor is not obligated at all. Even if the prospective guarantor says in the presence of a court: "I will guarantee the money," he is not liable.
If, however, he formalizes his commitment to guarantee the money with a kinyan, he becomes obligated in all the above situations. This applies whether the kinyan was made in the presence of the court, or together with the lender alone.
א
המלוה את חבירו ואחר שהלוהו אמר לו אחד אני ערב, או שתבע את הלוה בדין ואמר לו אחר הנח ואני ערב, או שהיה חונק את חבירו בשוק ליתן לו ואמר לו הנח ואני ערב אין הערב חייב כלום, ואפילו אמר אני ערב בפני ב"ד, אבל אם קנו מידו שהוא ערב ממון זה כל אלו הפנים בין בפני ב"ד בין בינו לבין המלוה נשתעבד.
2
If, however, the guarantor told the lender when the money was being given: "Lend him, and I will be the guarantor," he becomes responsible. In such a situation, a kinyan is not necessary.
Similarly, if a court appointed him a guarantor, he becomes liable even though he did not affirm his commitment with a kinyan. For example, the court desired to expropriate property from the borrower, and this person told them: "Let him be. I will guarantee the debt for you." Since he receives satisfaction from being trusted by the court, he accepts a binding commitment upon himself.
ב
אמר לו בשעת מתן מעות הלוהו ואני ערב נשתעבד הערב ואינו צריך קנין, וכן אם ב"ד עשו אותו ערב נשתעבד אע"פ שלא קנו מידו, כגון שהיו ב"ד רוצין לגבות מן הלוה ואמר להם הניחוהו ואני ערב לכם הואיל ויש לו הנאה שהאמינוהו ב"ד באותה הנייה שעבד עצמו.
3
When a person lends money to a colleague because of the commitment of a guarantor, although though the guarantor becomes responsible to the lender, the lender should not demand payment from the guarantor first. Instead, he should demand payment from the borrower first. If he does not pay him, he should return to the guarantor and collect payment from him. When does the above apply? When the borrower does not own property. If, however, the borrower does own property. He should not collect the debt from the guarantor at all. Instead, he should collect from the borrower."
If, however, the borrower is a man of force, and the court cannot expropriate money from him, or he refuses to come to the court, the lender may collect payment from the guarantor first. Afterwards, the guarantor will make a reckoning with the borrower. If the guarantor can extract payment from him, he should. If that is not possible, the court should place the borrower under a ban of ostracism until he repays the guarantor.
ג
המלוה את חבירו ע"י ערב אע"פ שהערב משתעבד למלוה לא יתבע את הערב תחלה אלא תובע את הלוה תחלה אם לא נתן לו חוזר אצל הערב ונפרע ממנו, בד"א בשאין נכסים ללוה, אבל אם יש נכסים ללוה לא יפרע מן הערב כלל אלא מן הלוה, היה הלוה אלם ואין ב"ד יכולין להוציא מידו או שלא בא לדין ה"ז נפרע מן הערב תחלה ואח"כ יעשה הערב דין עם הלוה אם יכול להוציאו מידו יוציא או ישמתוהו ב"ד עד שיתן לו.
4
Although the lender makes a stipulation with the guarantor and tells him: "I am giving the loan on the condition that I can collect the debt from whomever I desire," if the borrower possesses property, he should not collect the debt from the guarantor.
If he stipulated, "I am giving the loan on the condition that I can collect the debt from whomever I desire first," or the guarantor was a kablan, the lender may demand payment from this guarantor or this kablan first. He may collect payment from them although the borrower possesses property.
ד
התנה המלוה על הערב ואמר לו על מנת שאפרע ממי שאצרה אם יש נכסים ללוה לא יפרע מן הערב, אמר על מנת שאפרע ממי שארצה תחלה או שהיה קבלן הרי זה יתבע את הערב הזה או את הקבלן תחלה ויפרע מהן אף על פי שיש נכסים ללוה. 1
5
Who is considered to be an ordinary guarantor and who is considered to be a kablan? If a person says: "Give him the loan and I will give you," he is considered to be a kablan. The lender has the option of seeking repayment from him, even though he did not explicitly stipulate: "On the condition that I can collect the debt from whomever I desire first."
If, however, he tells him: "Lend him and I will act as a guarantor," "Lend him and I will pay," "Lend him and I am obligated," "Lend him and I will give," "Lend him and I will act as a kablan" "Give him and I will act as a kablan" "Give him and I will pay," "Give him and I am obligated," or "Give him and I will serve as a guarantor" - all of these are statements that cause him to be considered a guarantor. The lender may not demand payment from him first. Nor may he collect payment from him in a situation where the lender possesses property unless he stipulates: "On the condition that I can collect... from whomever I desire first"
ה
איזהו ערב ואיזהו קבלן אמר לו תן לו ואני נותן לך זהו קבלן שיש למלוה להפרע ממנו תחלה אע"פ שלא פירש ולא אמר על מנת שאפרע ממי שארצה, אבל אם אמר לו הלוהו ואני ערב הלוהו ואני פורע הלוהו ואני חייב הלוהו ואני נותן הלוהו ואני קבלן, תן לו ואני קבלן תן לו ואני פורע תן לו ואני חייב תן לו ואני ערב, כולן לשון ערבנות הן ואינו תובעו תחלה ולא נפרע ממנו במקום שיש נכסים ללוה עד שיפרש ויאמר ממי שארצה אפרע. 2
6
When a person guarantees a woman's ketubah he is not obligated to pay, even if he affirmed his commitment with a kinyan. The rationale is that he performed a mitzvah and did not cause her a financial loss. If a father guarantees his son's ketubah and affirms his commitment with a kinyan, the obligation is established. A person who becomes a kablan for a ketubah is liable.
ו
ערב של כתובה אע"פ שקנו מידו פטור מלשלם שהרי מצוה עשה ולא חסר ממון, ואם היה האב ערב לכתובת בנו וקנו מידו חייב, וקבלן של כתובה חייב. 3
7
The following rules apply when Reuven sells Shimon a field and Levi accepts financial responsibility for it. Levi is not considered responsible, for this is an asmachta. If he affirmed with a kinyan his commitment to pay the money involved in this sale whenever demanded to do so by Shimon, he is obligated to do so. My masters ruled in this manner.
ז
ראובן שמכר לשמעון שדה ובא לוי וקיבל אחריות עליו לא נשתעבד לוי שזו אסמכתא היא, ואם קנו מידו שהוא ערב לשלם דמי מכר זה כל עת שירצה שיתבענו לשמעון הרי זה חייב וכזה הורו רבותי. 4
8
Similarly, if a guarantor or a kablan make a conditional commitment, they do not become obligated even if the commitment is affirmed by a kinyan. The rationale is that this is an asmachta.
What is implied? For example, the guarantor told him: "Give him the loan and I will give you if this-and-this will take place," or "... if it will not take place." The rationale is that whenever a person undertakes an obligation for which he is personally not liable and makes it dependent on a condition: "if this takes place," or "if this does not take place," he never makes a wholehearted commitment or kinyan. Therefore, he does not become liable.
ח
וכן הערב או הקבלן שחייבו עצמן על תנאי אע"פ שקנו מידו לא נשתעבד מפני שהוא אסמכתא, כיצד כגון שאמר לו תן לו ואני אתן לך אם יהיה כך וכך או אם לא יהיה, שכל התולה שיעבוד שאינו חייב בו באם יהיה ואם לא יהיה לא גמר והקנה קנין שלם ולפיכך לא נשתעבד.
9
When two people take out loans from the same person and record their debts in the same promissory note or together purchase a single article, they are considered as having guaranteed the other person's commitment even though they do not explicitly agree to do so. The same law applies when one of a group of partners undertakes a loan or makes a purchase for the partnership.
ט
שנים שלוו בשטר אחד או שלקחו מקח אחד, וכן השותפין שלוה אחד מהן או לקח בשותפות הרי הן ערבאין זה לזה אע"פ שלא פירש.
10
When two people both commit themselves to guarantee a debt taken on by one person, when the lender comes to collect payment from the guarantor, he may collect from either one of them, as he desires. If, however, one of them does not possess the entire amount of the debt, the lender may demand payment of the remainder from the other guarantor.
י
שנים שערבו לאחד כשיבוא המלוה ליפרע מן הערב יפרע מאי זה מהן שירצה, ואם לא היה לאחד כדי החוב חוזר ותובע השני בשאר החוב. 5
11
If one person guarantees the debts of two different individuals, when a lender comes to collect payment he should tell the guarantor which of the two debts he is paying so that the guarantor will be able to seek reimbursement from the debtor.
יא
ואחד שערב לשנים כשיפרע למלוה יודיעו על חוב איזה משניהם פורע כדי שיחזור עליו.
12
When a person tells a colleague: "Guarantee a debt for so-and-so for this-and-this amount and I will guarantee the sum to you," it is as if he tells him: "Lendhim the money and I will guarantee the debt." Just as the guarantor becomes obligated to the lender, the second guarantor becomes obligated to the first guarantor. The same laws that govern the relationship between the guarantor and the lender govern the relationship between the first guarantor and the second guarantor.
יב
האומר לחבירו ערוב לפלוני כך וכך ואני ערב לך הרי זה כמי שאמר לו הלוהו ואני ערב, וכשם שנשתעבד הערב למלוה כך נשתעבד ערב לערב ראשון, ודין הערב עם המלוה ודין ערב ראשון עם השני דין אחד הוא.
13
The following opinions were stated with regard to a person who did not limit the extent of the commitment he made to serve as a guarantor. For example, he told the lender: "Give him whatever you give him, I will guarantee it," "Sell to him, and I will guarantee it," or "Lend him, and I will guarantee it."
There are Geonim who rule that even if the other person sells 10,000 zuz worth of merchandise or lends 100,000 zuz to the person named, the guarantor becomes responsible for the entire amount. It appears to me, by contrast, that the guarantor is not liable at all. Since he does not know for what he undertook the liability, he did not make a serious commitment and did not obligate himself. These are words of reason that a person of understanding will appreciate.
יג
מי שלא פירש קצב הדבר שערב כגון שאמר לו כל מה שתתן תן לו ואני ערב או מכור לו ואני ערב או הלוהו ואני ערב יש מן הגאונים שהורה אפילו מכר לו בעשרת אלפים או הלוה מאה אלף נשתעבד הערב בכל, ויראה לי שאין זה הערב חייב כלום שכיון שאינו יודע הדבר ששיעבד עצמו בו לא סמכה דעתו ולא שיעבד עצמו ודברים של טעם הם למבין. 6
14
When a person tells a colleague: "Lend him. I will guarantee the borrower's physical person," he did not make a commitment with regard to the money itself. What he meant was: Whenever you want, I will bring him to you.
Similar principles apply when, after the lender makes the loan and demands payment, a person says: "Let him go. Whenever you lodge a claim against him, I will bring him to you." If he affirms his commitment with a kinyan, there are Geonim who rule that if the guarantor does not bring the borrower to the court, the guarantor is obligated to pay. There are, however, others who rule that even if he made a stipulation saying: "If I do not bring him, or if he dies or he flees, I will be obligated to pay," the guarantor does not become liable, for this is an asmachta. I favor this understanding.
יד
מי שאמר לחבירו הלוהו ואני ערב לגופו של לוה זה לא ערב לעצמו של ממון אלא כל זמן שתרצה אביאנו לך, וכן אם אמר לו אחר שהלוהו ותבעו הניחהו כל זמן שתתבענו אביאנו לך וקנו מידו על זה אם לא יביא זה הלוה יש מן הגאונים שהורה שהוא חייב לשלם, ויש מי שהורה שאפילו התנה ואמר אם לא אביאנו או שמת או שברח אהיה חייב לשלם הרי זו אסמכתא ולא נשתעבד ולזה דעתי נוטה. 7
FOOTNOTES
1.התנה המלוה עם הערב וכו' עד שיש נכסים ללוה. א"א שבוש הוא שאע"פ שאמר על מנת שאפרע ממי שארצה תחלה אם יש נכסים ללוה לא יפרע מן הערב עכ"ל.
2.אבל אם אמר לו הלוהו ואני וכו' עד ממי שארצה אפרע. א"א אף זה שבוש עכ"ל.
3.ערב של כתובה וכו' עד וקבלן של כתובה חייב. א"א כי האב אע"פ שלא קנו מידו עכ"ל.
4.ראובן שמכר לשמעון וכו' עד וכזה הורו רבותי. א"א שבוש הוא זה שאם אמר בשעת מתן מעות משתעבד ואין בערבות משום אסמכתא עכ"ל.
5.שנים שערבו לאחד עד בשאר החוב. א"א אינו מחוור אלא לפי המנהג ולמדין מן העכו"ם לישראל עכ"ל.
6.מי שלא פירש וכו' עד ודברים של טעם וכו'. א"א וא"כ לא ברב ולא במעט אלא כדי שהדעת מגעת לשם שהוא רגיל ואמיד נשתעבד עכ"ל.
7.מי שאמר לחבירו הלוהו ואני ערב לגופו של וכו' עד ולזה דעתי נוטה. א"א דל אסמכתא מהכא שהרי סלקו אותה בגמרא אלא אם אמר בשעת מתן מעות הלוהו ואני ערב לך להביא בידך את גופו ואם לא אוכל להשיבו אשלם לית דין ולית דיין שהוא חייב לשלם ואם לא אמר לו כך למה יתחייב ממון אלא י"ל שיבא גוף תחת גוף עד שיתפשר עמו עכ"ל.
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 26
1
The following law applies when a person gives a loan to a colleague that is supported by a promissory note. After the witnesses signed the promissory note, the guarantor came and made a guarantee for the borrower's debt. Although his commitment was affirmed with a kinyan and thus he become obligated to pay, as explained, when the lender comes to expropriate payment from the property of this guarantor, he may not expropriate property that has already been sold.
Different rules apply if the guarantor was mentioned in the promissory note itself before the signature of the witnesses. If they wrote: "So-and-so is the guarantor," the lender may not expropriate property that has already been sold, because the guarantor's name is not associated together with that of the borrower with regard to the loan. If, however, the promissory note states: "So-and-so borrowed such-and-such an amount from so-and-so and so-and-so guaranteed the loan, the guarantor affirmed his commitment with a kinyan, and then the witnesses signed the promissory note," the lender may expropriate property that has already been sold. The rationale is that the guarantor's name is associated together with that of the borrower in the promissory note.
א
המלוה את חבירו בשטר ואחר שהעידו העדים בשטר בא ערב וערב את הלוה אע"פ שקנו מידו ונשתעבד לשלם כמו שביארנו כשיבא המלוה להפרע מנכסי הערב הזה אינו טורף מנכסים משועבדים, היה הערב בגופו של שטר קודם חתימת העדים אם כתבו פלוני ערב שהרי אינו מעורב עם הלוה במלוה אינו גובה ממנו מן המשועבדים אבל אם כתוב בשטר פלוני לוה מפלוני כך וכך ופלוני ערב שהרי ערבו לוה עם ערב בשטר וקנו מידו של ערב ואח"כ חתמו עדים בשטר ה"ז נפרע מנכסי ערב המשועבדים.
2
When a lender demands payment from the borrower and discovers that he does not have property, he may not expropriate payment from the guarantor until 30 days after the guarantor became obligated to pay. The legal power of the guarantor should not be less than that of the borrower himself. The halachic authorities ruled in this manner. If, however, the lender made a stipulation with the guarantor about this matter, that stipulation is followed."
ב
מלוה שתבע את הלוה ולא מצא לו נכסים אינו יכול להפרע מן הערב עד אחר שלשים יום מיום שנתחייב הערב לשלם לא יהיה כח זה פחות מן הלוה עצמו וכזה הורו המורים, ואם התנה עמו הכל לפי התנאי.
3
When a lender comes to demand payment from a borrower, the borrower cannot turn away the lender, telling him: "Go to the kablan, because you have the right to demand payment from him first." Instead, the lender may demand payment from anyone he desires first. If, however, the kablan took the money from the lender and gave it to the borrower, the lender has nothing to do with the borrower. If the borrower was in another country and the lender cannot notify him -or the borrower died and left heirs below the age of majority, whose property the court cannot attach - the lender may demand payment from the guarantor first, because the borrower is not at hand.
ג
מלוה שבא לתבוע את הלוה ולא מצא לו נכסים אינו יכול לדחותו ולומר לך אצל הקבלן הרי יש לך לתבוע אותו תחלה אלא תובע כל מי שרצה תחלה, ואם נשא הקבלן המעות מיד המלוה ונתנו ביד הלוה אין למלוה ביד הלוה כלום, היה הלוה במדינה אחרת שאינו יכול להודיעו ולא לילך אליו או שמת הלוה והניח יתומים קטנים שאין ב"ד נזקקין לנכסיהן ה"ז תובע את הערב תחלה שהרי אין הלוה מצוי.
4
When a lender demands payment from the borrower and discovers that he has become impoverished, he may not demand payment from the guarantor until the borrower takes an oath that he is bankrupt, as ordained by the later sages. The rationale is that we fear that the borrower and the lender might be trying to obtain the guarantor's property through deception.
ד
מלוה שתבע את הלוה ומצאו שהוא עני אינו יכול להפרע מן הערב עד שישבע הלוה בתקנת אחרונים שאין לו כלום שמא יעשו קנוניא על נכסיו של ערב.
5
The following law applies when a person has guaranteed a colleague with regard to a loan supported by a verbal commitment alone, the lender comes to demand payment from the guarantor, and the borrower is overseas. The guarantor may tell the lender: "Bring proof that the borrower did not repay you and I will pay you."
ה
מי שהיה ערב לחבירו במלוה על פה ובא המלוה לתבוע את הערב והרי הלוה במדינת הים, אומר לו הערב הבא ראיה שלא פרעך הלוה ואני אשלם לך.
6
When a guarantor takes the initiative and pays the debt to the creditor, he may come back and collect from the borrower everything that he paid on his account, even though the loan was supported by a verbal commitment alone or was not observed by witnesses.
When does the above apply? When, at the time the guarantor made his commitment, the borrower told him: "Become my guarantor and pay." When, however, he acted independently and became a guarantor or a kablan, or the borrower told him: "Guarantee the debt for me," but did not give him the authority to pay the debt, if he pays the debt, the borrower is not obligated to pay him anything. Similarly, if a person pays a promissory note of a colleague without that colleague's knowledge, even if it is a debt for which security was taken, the borrower is not obligated to pay him anything. Instead, he may take his security without paying anything; the other person forfeits his money. The rationale is that perhaps the borrower would have been able to appease the lender and have him waive the debt.
The following rules apply when the borrower dies, and the guarantor takes the initiative and pays the debt before he notifies the heirs. If it is known to us that the borrower did not pay the promissory note before he died - e.g., he admitted the debt on his deathbed, he was placed under a band of ostracism for failing to pay, and he died under that ban, or the due date of the loan did not arrive - he may collect from the heirs everything that he paid.
When the lender was a gentile, the heirs are not obligated to pay the guarantor. The rationale is that their parent might have given the guarantor the entire debt for which he was responsible. For a gentile demands payment from the guarantor first; for this reason the guarantor paid the gentile voluntarily before he notified the orphans. If, however, he notifies them that the gentile is demanding payment from him and that he is paying, the heirs are obligated to pay.
ו
ערב שקידם ונתן לבעל חוב את חובו הרי זה חוזר וגובה מן הלוה כל מה שפרע על ידו אף על פי שהיתה מלוה על פה או בלא עדים כלל, בד"א כשאמר לו הלוה בעת שנעשה לו ערב ערבני ושלם, אבל אם עמד ברשות עצמו ונעשה לו ערב או קבלן או שאמר לו הלוה ערבני ולא הרשהו שיתן ויפרע החוב אין הלוה חייב לשלם לו כלום, וכן הפורע שטר חובו של חבירו שלא מדעתו אפילו היה החוב על המשכון אין הלוה חייב כלום ונוטל משכונו בחנם והרי אבד זה הנותן את מעותיו שמא היה הלוה מפייס את המלוה ומוחל לו, מת הלוה וקידם הערב ופרע החוב קודם שיודיע את היורשים אם נודע לנו שלא פרע הלוה שטר חובו קודם שימות כגון שהודה בו קודם או שנדוהו ומת בנדויו או שלא הגיע זמן המלוה להגבות ה"ז חוזר וגובה מן היורשין כל מה שפרע, היה המלוה עכו"ם אין היורשין חייבין לשלם שמא אביהן נתן ליד הערב כל החוב שהיה עליו מפני שהעכו"ם תובע את הערב תחילה ולפיכך פרע זה מדעתו קודם שיודיע היתומים, אבל אם הודיען שהעכו"ם תובע אותו והרי הוא נותן חייבין לשלם. 1
7
Whenever a guarantor comes to collect what he paid - whether he comes to collect from the borrower's heirs or from the borrower himself - he must bring proof that he paid the debt. The guarantor's possession of the promissory note is not considered proof. For perhaps the promissory note fell from the lender's hand, and the guarantor did not pay him at all.
ז
כל ערב שבא ליטול מה שפרע בין שבא להפרע מיורשי לוה בין מלוה עצמו ה"ז צריך להביא ראיה שפרע ואין מציאת שטר החוב שעליו ביד הערב ראיה שמא נפל השטר מיד המלוה ולא פרע זה כלום.
8
In all the claims to be mentioned, and in all similar situations, we follow the principle: When a person who seeks to expropriate property from a colleague, the burden of proof is upon him:
a) a person tells a colleague, "You agreed to serve as a guarantor for me," and the alleged guarantor denies accepting the obligation ;
b) the guarantor tells the borrower: "You gave me the license to act as a guarantor for you and to pay," and the borrower tells him: "You acted as a guarantor on your own initiative," or "You were not a guarantor at all";
c) the guarantor said: "I paid the debt in your presence," and the borrower said: "You did not"; or he told him: "I have already given you what you paid"; or
d) the lender told the guarantor: "You guaranteed 200," and the guarantor said: "I guaranteed only a maneh."
Alternatively, the defendant should take a sh'vuat hessefi or a Scriptural oath if he agreed to a portion of the claim, as is the law with regard to all financial claims.
ח
האומר לחבירו ערבת לי והוא אומר לא ערבתי, או שאמר הערב ללוה אתה הרשיתני לערוב אותך וליתן והוא אומר מדעתך ערבת או לא ערבת כלל, או שאמר הערב פרעתי המלוה בפניך והלה אומר לא פרעת, או שאמר לו כן פרעת ונתתי לך מה שפרעת, או שאמר המלוה ערבת לי מאתים והוא אומר לא ערבתי אלא מנה, מכל אלו הטענות וכיוצא בהן המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה, או ישבע הנתבע שבועת היסת או שבועת התורה אם הודה במקצת כשאר כל טענת הממון.
9
The following principles apply when a servant or a married woman borrows money or guarantees the debts of others and is obligated to pay: When the servant is freed and the woman is divorced or widowed, they must pay.
ט
עבד או אשת איש שלוו או שערבו את אחרים ונתחייבו לשלם, כשישתחרר העבד ותתגרש האשה או תתאלמן ישלמו.
10
If a minor borrows, he is obligated to pay when he attains majority. We do not, however, write a promissory note against him. Instead, even though it was affirmed with a kinyan, the loan has the status of a loan supported by a verbal commitment alone. The rationale is that a kinyan undertaken by a minor is of no substance.
י
קטן שלוה חייב לשלם כשיגדיל ואין כותבין עליו שטר אלא הרי היא מלוה על פה אע"פ שקנו מידו שאין קנין מיד הקטן כלום.
11
In a situation where a minor guaranteed others, the Geonim ruled that he is not liable to pay even after he attains majority. The person who lent his money because of a minor's word forfeits it. The rationale is that a minor does not have the intellectual responsibility to obligate himself in a matter in which he is not liable - not through becoming a guarantor, nor through other similar means. This is a ruling of truth and it is fitting to rule in this manner.
יא
קטן שערב את אחרים הורו הגאונים שאינו חייב לשלם כלום אף כשיגדיל וזה שנתן את מעותיו על פי הקטן אבד את מעותיו שאין לקטן דעת כדי לשעבד עצמו בדבר שאינו חייב בו ולא בערבנות ולא בכל כיוצא בזה ודין אמת הוא וכן ראוי לדון.
12
When a woman takes a loan that is supported by a promissory note or undertakes a commitment as a guarantor of a promissory note and then marries, she is obligated to pay even after she marries. If, however, it is a loan supported by a verbal commitment alone, it should not be repaid until she becomes divorced or widowed. The rationale is that her husband's authority is that of a purchaser, as we have explained in several sources. If, however, the money that was given as a loan is in her possession, it should be returned to the borrower.
יב
האשה שלותה בשטר או ערבה בשטר ונשאת חייבת לשלם אחר שנשאת, ואם היתה מלוה על פה אינה משלמת עד שתתגרש או שתתאלמן שרשות בעל כרשות לוקח הוא כמו שביארנו בכמה מקומות, ואם היו אותן מעות ההלואה עצמן קיימין יחזירו אותן למלוה.
FOOTNOTES
1.בד"א וכו' עד חייב לשלם לו כלום. א"א אלו דברים שאין הדעת מקבלתן ואין השכל סובלן עכ"ל.
Malveh veLoveh - Chapter 27
1
No matter which language and which characters a legal document is written in, if it is written according to the regulations for legal documents that prevail among the Jewish people, i.e., it cannot be forged, nor is it possible to add to or detract from the content of the document, and its witnesses are Jews and they know how to read it, it is acceptable and may be used to expropriate property that has been sold.
All documents that are signed by gentiles, by contrast, are not acceptable except for deeds of sale and promissory notes. For the latter to be acceptable, the principal must count the money in their presence and they must write on the legal document: "In our presence, so-and-so counted out for so-and-so the money for the sale," or "... the money for the debt." This applies provided that they were prepared by their legal authorities. If, however, the documents were prepared in their courts without being authorized by their judges, they are of no value. Similarly, Jewish witnesses must testify that the gentile witnesses who signed the document and the judge who authorized their signatures are not known to accept bribes. If legal documents composed by gentiles lack any of these qualifications, they are considered shards. Similarly, legal documents acknowledging an obligation, deeds recording presents, compromises, and waivers of obligations are considered shards even if they are composed with all the above qualifications.
My masters ruled that even promissory notes composed by them that state that the money was given in their presence are unacceptable. They accepted only deeds of sale when the money was given in their presence. I do not accept this ruling.
If the Jewish judges do not know how to read a legal document prepared by gentile authorities, they should give it to two gentiles, each one outside the presence of the other, and have them read. Thus, each one of them is reading as is his ordinary practice. The document may be used to expropriate property that has not been sold. It may not, however, be used to expropriate property that has been sold, because it does not become public knowledge. For the purchasers will not know of legal processes carried out by gentiles.
א
שטר שכתוב בכל לשון ובכל כתב אם היה עשוי כתיקון שטרי ישראל שאינן יכולין להזדייף ולא להוסיף ולא לגרוע והיו עדיו ישראל ויודעין לקרותו הרי הוא כשר וגובין בו מן המשועבדין, אבל כל השטרות שחותמיהן עכו"ם הרי אלו פסולין חוץ משטרי מקח וממכר ושטרי חוב והוא שיתן המעות בפניהם ויכתבו בשטר לפנינו מנה פלוני לפלוני כך וכך דמי המכר או מעות החוב, והוא שיהיו עשויין בערכאות שלהם, אבל במקום קבוץ פליליהן בלא קיום השופט שלהם לא יועילו כלום, וכן צריכין עדי ישראל שיעידו על אלו העכו"ם שהן עדי שטר ועל זה השופט שלהן שקיים עדותן שאינן ידועין בקבלנות שוחד, ואם חסרו שטרי העכו"ם דבר מכל אלו הרי הן כחרס, וכן שטרי [חוב] והודאות ומתנות ופשרות ומחילות שהן בעדים שלהן אע"פ שיש בהן כל הדברים שמנינו הרי הן כחרסים, והורו רבותי שאפילו שטרי חוב שלהן שנתנו המעות בפניהם פסולין ולא הכשירו אלא שטרי מקח וממכר שנתנו המעות בפניהם ואין אני מודה בזה, אם לא ידעו דייני ישראל לקרות שטר זה הנעשה בערכאות של עכו"ם נותנו לשני עכו"ם זה שלא בפני זה וקורין לו שנמצא כל אחד מהן כמסיח לפי תומו וגובה בו מבני חורין אבל אין טורפין בו מפני שאין לו קול שהרי לא ידעו הלקוחות במה שנעשה בעכו"ם. 1
2
When a promissory note that was signed by gentile witnesses was given by the borrower to the lender or by the seller to the purchaser in the presence of two Jewish witnesses, it is acceptable and may be used to expropriate property that was not sold, even though it was not authenticated by the gentile legal authorities and was not prepared according to all the stipulations mentioned above. The above applies provided that the witnesses in whose presence the legal document was transferred were able to read it, they read it when it was transferred, and it was prepared according to the regulations for legal documents that prevail among the Jewish people, i.e., that it be composed in a manner that it cannot be forged, nor is it possible to add to or detract from the content of the document.
Why is it not acceptable to be used to expropriate property that has already been sold? Because it is not a matter of public knowledge.
ב
שטר שעדיו עכו"ם שמסרו הלוה ליד המלוה או המוכר ליד הלוקח בפני שני עדים מישראל אע"פ שאינו עשוי בערכאות של עכו"ם ואין בו כל הדברים שמנינו ה"ז גובה מבני חורין, והוא שיהיו העדים שמסר בפניהם יודעין לקרותו וקראוהו בשמסרו /כשמסרו/ בפניהן ויהיה כתיקון שטר ישראל שאינו יכול להזדייף ולא להוסיף ולא לגרוע, ולמה לא יגבה בו מן המשועבדים מפני שאין לו קול.
3
The following regulations prevail for legal documents among the Jewish people: All legal documents must repeat the content of the legal document in the last line, because we do not take into consideration what was written in that line. The rationale is that we suspect the witnesses signed a line away from the body of the document and this falsifier came and wrote in the empty space of this line.
ג
תיקון שטרי ישראל כך הוא כל השטרות כולן צריך שיחזור מענינו של שטר בשיטה אחרונה [אלא] שאין למדין משיטה אחרונה שמא היו העדים מרוחקין מגופו של שטר בכדי השיטה ובא זה המזייף וכתב באותו הריוח שיטה זו.
4
When the witnesses signed two lines or more from the conclusion of the writing, the document is not acceptable. If they leave less open space than this, it is acceptable.
The two lines mentioned refer to lines according to the handwriting of the witnesses and not according to the handwriting of the scribe. The rationale is that any person who forges will try to imitate the handwriting of the witnesses and not that of the scribe. The space of the two lines includes the lines and the space in between them, i.e., the space necessary to write a lamed above a final chaf.
If there was a space of more than two lines between the signature of the witnesses and the text of the documents, and they filled the space between the text and the signatures with the signatures of unacceptable witnesses and relatives, it is acceptable. For in this manner, it cannot be forged.
If the space was filled with lines of ink, it is unacceptable. For perhaps the witnesses signed for the lines of ink and not for the body of the document. If the document and the signatures of the witnesses were on one line, it is acceptable.
ד
עדים שהיו מרוחקין מן הכתב שתי שיטין פסול פחות מכאן כשר, שתי שיטין שאמרו בכתב ידי עדים ולא בכתב ידי סופר שכל המזייף אינו הולך אחר הסופר אלא אחר העדים, ושתי שיטין אלו הן ואוירן כגון למ"ד על כ"ף, היו העדי' מרוחקין מן הכתב יתר על שתי שיטין והיה הריוח שבין הכתב והעדים מלא בעדים פסולין או קרובים הרי זה כשר שהרי אינו יכול להזדייף, ואם מלאהו בשריטה של דיו פסול שמא העדים על השריטות חתמו ולא על גופו [של שטר], היה השטר כולו עם עדיו בשיטה אחת הרי זה כשר.
5
If the legal document was written on one line, and the witnesses signed on another line, it is unacceptable. We fear that possibly the witnesses had signed one line away from an acceptable legal document, and afterwards the person cut away that entire legal document and wrote the present document on that line. Thus, these witnesses were signed upon it.
A similar suspicion can arise when the document and the signatures of two witnesses were written on one line, two other witnesses were signed on a second line, and the maker of the legal document says: "I intended to increase the number of witnesses."
We do not verify the authenticity of the document based on the signature of the witnesses below, in the second line, but rather on the signatures of those above. We fear that possibly there had been another document written originally, it was cut off, and the present document and the signatures of the two witnesses were written on the line between it and the witnesses who signed below.
ה
היה השטר בשיטה זו והעדים בשיטה שניה פסול שמא אלו העדים היו מרוחקין מן השטר כשר שיטה אחת וחתך כל השטר וכתב זה השטר באותה השיטה ונמצאו כל אלו העדים חתומים עליה, וכן אם היה השטר ושני עדים בשיטה אחת ושני עדים אחרים בשיטה שניה ואמר אני נתכוונתי לרבות העדים אין מקיימין שטר זה מעדים של מטה בשיטה שניה אלא מעדים של מעלה, שמא בשיטה שהיתה בין העדים של מטה ובין השטר שחתך כתב שטר זה ושני עדיו.
6
The validation of the authenticity of the signatures of the witnesses by the court should be positioned next to their signatures, next to one of the sides of the legal document, or on its back, opposite the text. If there was a space of more than one line between the statement of validation and the legal document, it is invalid. We fear that someone might cut off the document that was validated and forge a new document and the signature of two witnesses on that one line. Thus, the validation would be on a forged document.
ו
קיום ב"ד צריך שיהיה סמוך לכתב ידי עדים או סמוך לצד השטר או מאחוריו כנגד הכתב, ואם היה בין הקיום והשטר ריוח שיטה אחת פסול שמא יחתוך השטר שנתקיים ויזייף באותה שיטה שטר ושני עדיו, ונמצא הקיום על שטר מזוייף.
7
If the court wrote the validation more than two lines from the legal document and filled the entire empty space with lines of ink, the validation is acceptable, for there is no possibility of a forgery. ' And we do not suspect that the court would sign a validation of mere lines, but rather of the legal document itself.
ז
הרחיק את הקיום מן השטר יתר על שתי שיטין ומלא כל הריוח שריטות דיו כשר שהרי אינו יכול לזייף ואין חוששין לב"ד שיקיימו קיום על השריטות אלא על גופו של שטר.
8
Whenever words are written on a surface where there have been erasures, the scribe must write a validation of each of the these portions at the end of the legal document, stating: "This-and-this letter...", "This-and-this word...", or "This-and-this line were written on a surface where there had been erasures," or "... are attached between the lines. Everything is valid."
If the erasure is in the place where the document states sharir v'kayam, and is the size that it takes to write these words, it is not acceptable even if the scribe validates that these words were written on an erased surface. We fear that a person might have erased the words sharir v'kayam, then written a false statement and then validated the document in the space between the document and the signature of the witnesses.
ח
כל המחקין כולן צריך שיכתוב קיומיהן בסוף השטר ויאמר אות פלונית או מלה פלונית או שיטה פלונית על מחק או תלויה והכל קיים, ואם היה המחק במקום שריר וקיים ובשיעור שריר וקיים אע"פ שחזר וקיימו פסול שמא מחקו וכתב דבר שזייף וחזר וקיימו בריוח שבין הכתב והעדים.
9
When both a legal document and the signatures of the witnesses are written on a surface where there have been erasures, it is acceptable. If one might protest, saying: "The person in possession of the document might erase it again and write a text that benefits him," that argument can be answered, for it is possible to differentiate between a surface that has been erased once and one that has been erased twice.
If one might protest, saying: "Maybe the person erased only the surface where the witnesses would sign twice, and then after writing the legal document above the twice-erased surface and having the witnesses sign it, he erased the document and wrote whatever he desired." In such a situation, the document and the signatures of the witnesses appear the same, because everything was erased twice. This protest is untenable, because our Sages already ordained that witnesses should not sign a document written on a surface where there have been erasures, unless it was erased in their presence.
ט
שטר הבא הוא ועדיו על המחק כשר, ואם תאמר מוחק וחוזר ומוחק אינו דומה מי שנמחק פעם אחת לנמחק שתי פעמים, ואם תאמר שמא נמחק ב' פעמים מקום העדים ואחר שכתב השטר חוזר ומוחקו וכותב כל מה שירצה שהרי הוא ועדיו כולו שוה מפני שנמחק הכל שתי פעמים כבר תקנו חכמים שלא יהיו העדים חותמין על שטר מחוק אא"כ נמחק בפניהם.
10
When a legal document and the signatures of the witnesses are both written on a surface where there have been erasures, and the validation of the authenticity of the signatures was written on paper that had never been erased, we do not validate the document because of the signatures of the witnesses who validated it previously, but because of the signatures of the witnesses who signed it originally.
The rationale is that it is possible that the validation of the document was written very far from the document itself, and the space between them was filled with lines of ink. We suspect that the person in possession of the document cut off the document itself, erased the lines of ink, and forged the document and the signatures of the witnesses on the portion that had been erased.
י
שטר הבא הוא ועדיו על המחק והקיום מלמטה על הנייר אין מקיימין אותו מעדי הקיום אלא מעדים שלמעלה שמא הקיום היה רחוק מן השטר הרבה והיה הריוח מלא שריטות של דיו וחתך גוף השטר ומחק השריטות וכתב השטר ועדיו על המחק.
11
When a document is written on paper that had never been erased, and the witnesses signed on a surface where there were erasures, it is unacceptable. We suspect that the person might erase the document that the witnesses signed and replace it with a forgery. Thus, the document and the signatures of the witnesses will be on paper with erasures.
If the witnesses wrote: "We, the witnesses, signed on the portion of the paper where there were erasures, while the document was written on the portion of the paper that has never been erased," the document is acceptable. This statement should be written between the signature of one witness and the other, so that deception is not possible.
יא
שטר הבא על הנייר ועדיו על המחק פסול שמא ימחוק השטר ויזדייף ונמצא הוא ועדיו על המחק, ואם כתבו העדים אנחנו העדים חתמנו על המחק והשטר על הנייר כשר וכותבין כן בין עד לעד כדי שלא יזייף.
12
When a legal document is written on a portion of a paper where there have been erasures and the witnesses sign on a portion of the paper that has never been erased, the document is not acceptable. This applies even if the witnesses write: "We, the witnesses, signed on the portion of the paper that has never been erased, while the document was written on the portion where there were erasures."
The rationale is that we fear the person in possession of the document will erase it a second time and write on it anything that he desires. Since the document as a whole has been erased twice, the forgery will not be obvious.
If, by contrast, one portion of the document was erased once and the other twice, a distinction could be made.
Among the prevailing regulations for legal documents is to carefully scrutinize the document, seeing if the vavin and the zayinin are not squeezed between the letters, lest the person have forged this letter, adding it to the document. Similarly, these letters must not be too far from the other letters of the word, lest the person have erased a portion of one letter - e.g., a hei or a chet - and left one of its legs in the place of a vav. Similarly, in all analogous situations, we scrutinize the text in any language and with any characters.
יב
שטר הבא על המחק ועדיו על הנייר פסול, ואפילו כתבו העדים אנחנו עדים חתמנו על הנייר והשטר על המחק, מפני שהוא מוחק אותו פעם ב' וכותב כל מה שירצה וכיון שכולו נמחק ב' פעמים אינו ניכר, שאילו היה בו מקום הנמחק פעם אחת ומקום הנמחק שתי פעמים היה ניכר, ומתקון השטרות להתבונן בשטר בואוי"ן וזייני"ן שלו שלא יהו דחוקין בין התיבות שמא זייף והוסיף זו, ולא יהיו מרוחקין שמא מחק אות אחת כגון ה"א או חי"ת והניח רגלה האחת מקום וא"ו וכל כיוצא בזה מדקדקין בו בכל לשון ובכל כתב.
13
The numbers from shalosh (three) to esser (ten) should not be written at the end of a line, for it is possible for the person in possession of the document to forge the text and make the shalosh, sheloshim (30), and the esser, essrim (20).
If it would happen that a scribe would have to write these numbers at the end of a line, he should repeat the text of the document several times until the numbers come out in the middle of the line.
יג
משלש ועד עשר אין כותבין בסוף שיטה שמא יזייף ויחזיר השלש לשלשים והעשר עשרים, ואם נזדמן לו בסוף שיטה מחזיר הדבור בגופו של שטר פעמים רבות עד שיבא באמצע השיטה.
14
When the upper portion of a promissory note speaks of a maneh and the lower portion speaks of 200 zuz, or the upper portion of a promissory note speaks of 200 zuz and the lower portion speaks of a maneh, everything follows what is written in the lower portion.
Why do we not follow the lesser of the two numbers? Because in this instance, one is not dependent on the other. If the promissory note had said: "owes amaneh, which is 200 zuz" or "200 zuz, which is amaneh," the lender would be granted only a maneh. When, however, there are two matters stated in the document and the latter portion is not dependent on the former portion, we follow the latter portion.
When the upper portion of a legal document mentions one name and the lower portion mentions a name that resembles it, we follow the lower portion. If so, why do we write the upper portion? So that if one letter of the lower portion is rubbed out, one could learn from the upper portion. For example, if the upper portion stated Chanani or Anani and the lower portion stated Chanan or Anan, we can assume that it is referring to the person named in the upper portion. This applies regarding only one letter. We do not, however, resolve a doubt regarding two letters in the lower portion from the upper portion.
יד
שטר שכתבו מלמעלה מנה ומלמטה מאתים מלמעלה מאתים ומלמטה מנה הכל הולך אחר התחתון, ולמה אין הולכין אחר הפחות שבשניהם לפי שאין האחד תלוי בחבירו שאם היה כתוב בו ק' שהן מאתים או מאתים שהן ק' היה נוטל ק', אבל ב' דברים שאין האחרון תלוי בראשון הלך אחר אחרון, היה בו מלמעלה שם ולמטה שם קרוב לו הלך אחר התחתון א"כ למה כותבין את העליון שמא תמחק אות אחת מן התחתון וילמד מן העליון כגון היה בעליון חנני או ענני ובתחתון חנן או ענן בידוע שהוא השם העליון, אבל לא ילמוד תחתון מעליון בשתי אותיות.
15
If the upper portion of a promissory note speaks of a sefel and the lower portion speaks of a kefel, we follow the wording of the latter portion, for a kefel is less than a sefel.
If the upper portion of a promissory note speaks of a kefel and the lower portion speaks of a sefel, we suspect that perhaps a fly caused the left leg of the kuf to be rubbed out and made it appear like a samech. Hence, the bearer may expropriate only a kefel, the lesser measure. Similar principles apply in all analogous situations, for the bearer of the promissory note has the weaker position.
An incident occurred concerning a promissory note that stated: "600 and one zuz" This raised a doubt. Was the intent 601 zuz or was the intent 600 isteira and one zuz? The Sages said: "The bearer of the promissory note may collect only 600 isteira and a zuz, for the bearer of the promissory note has the weaker position."
If so, why did they not say that he should collect 600 p'rutot and a zuz? Because a scribe would count the p'rutot as zuzin before composing the promissory note. Similar principles apply in all analogous situations. In all times and in all places, we follow the accepted norms.
טו
כתוב בו מלמעלה ספל ומלמטה קפל הכל הולך אחר התחתון שהקפל פחות מן הספל, כתוב בו מלמעלה קפל ומלמטה ספל חוששין שמא זבוב הסיר רגל הקוף ונעשית סמ"ך ואינו גובה אלא במדת קפל הקטנה וכן כל כיוצא בזה שיד בעל השטר על התחתונה, מעשה בשטר שהיה כתוב בו שש מאות וזוז אחד והרי הדבר ספק אם שש מאות זוז וזוז אחד או שש מאות אסתירא וזוז, אמרו חכמים יטול שש מאות אסתירא וזוז שיד בעל השטר על התחתונה, א"כ למה לא נאמר שש מאות פרוטה וזוז לפי שהפרוטות כולל אותן הסופר זוזין ואחר כך כותבין וכן כל כיוצא בזה בכל זמן ובכל מקום לפי דרכם הידוע על פיו עושין.
16
When a promissory note states: "Isteira 100 m'ie," or "100 m'ie isteira" one should follow the lesser of the phrases. The person should receive only one isteira. The rationale is that the bearer of the promissory note has the weaker position, because he is trying to expropriate property from a colleague, and a person can expropriate property only when there is no doubt regarding his claim.
Similarly, whenever a promissory note could be interpreted in either of two ways, either this way or that way, the bearer receives the lesser of the amounts. If, however, he seizes possession of the greater amount, the borrower may not expropriate the money from him unless he can clearly prove the legitimacy of his own claim.
טז
שטר שכתוב בו אסתירא מאה מעי או שכתוב בו מאה מעי אסתירא הלך אחר פחות שבלשונות ואינו נוטל אלא אסתירא אחת שיד בעל השטר על התחתונה, מפני שהוא המוציא מחבירו ואינו מוציא אלא בדבר שאין בו ספק, לפיכך כל שטר שיש בו משמע שתי לשונות שמא כך או שמא כך אינו נוטל אלא הפחות שבשתיהן, ואם תפס בעליונה אין מוציאין מידו אלא בראיה ברורה. 2
17
When a promissory note states: "a gold coin," we assume that the intent is no less than a golden dinar. If it states "gold of dinarim," or "dinarim of gold," we assume that the intent is no less than the value of two dinarim of gold. If it states "gold in dinarim" we assume that the intent is no less than the value in gold of two silver dinarim. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Blessed be God, who grants assistance.
יז
כתב בו מטבע זהב אין פחות מדינר זהב, זהב דינרין או דינרין זהב אין פחות משוה שני דינרין של זהב, זהב בדינרין אין פחות משוה שני דינרין של כסף מן הזהב, וכן כל כיוצא בזה. תמו הלכות מלוה ולוה.
FOOTNOTES
1.והורו רבותי וכו' עד איני מודה בזה. א"א יפה הורו רבותיו שאפילו היה שט"ח שלהן וכו' שהשטר העולה בערכאות שלהן וחותמיהן עכו"ם אינו גובה ממשועבדים דלית להו קלא הילכך אפשר שנפרע ולא תבעו עכ"ל.
2.שטר שכתוב בו אסתירא וכו' עד בדבר שאין בו ספק. א"א זה שבוש ואינו נוטל אלא אסתירא עכ"ל.
Menachem Av 29, 5777 · 08/21/2017
"Today's Day"
Monday, Menachem Av 29, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Shoftim, Sheini with Rashi.
Tehillim: 140-144.
Tanya: Therefore, my beloved, (p. 437) ...to Zion..." (p. 439).
There must be avoda by one's own efforts. Superior heights are attained when one is taken by the hand and led; it is more precious though, when it is by one's own strength.
Daily Thought:
Nothing Else
Deep in meditation, the mind’s eye catches a glimmer of light.
A glimmer of light from G‑d. But for one who seeks G‑d Himself, the light is not G‑d.
Secluded from the business of humankind and earthly pleasures, immersed in knowledge of the higher realms, there comes a day the prophet hears with his ears the voice that brings all into being, sees with his eyes the splendor of that light.
A splendorous light from G‑d. But the light is not G‑d.
In a time to come, every small child will see more than the greatest prophet could ever imagine, the physical eye will perceive more than any soul has ever known, there will be a world, and its entire being will be a means to know its Creator—so much so that the very stones of the earth will scream out, “There is nothing else but He!”
That is G‑d. [Maamar V’nachah Alav 5725.]
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment