| |||||
- 
- ב"ה - Today in Judaism - Today is Monday, 21 Tevet, 5778 · January 8, 2018Torah Reading:
Va'eira: Exodus 6:2-13
Va'eira: Exodus 6:2 God spoke to Moshe; he said to him, “I am Adonai. 3 I appeared to Avraham, Yitz’chak and Ya‘akov as El Shaddai, although I did not make myself known to them by my name, Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh [Adonai]. 4 Also with them I established my covenant to give them the land of Kena‘an, the land where they wandered about and lived as foreigners. 5 Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the people of Isra’el, whom the Egyptians are keeping in slavery; and I have remembered my covenant.
6 “Therefore, say to the people of Isra’el: ‘I am Adonai. I will free you from the forced labor of the Egyptians, rescue you from their oppression, and redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. 7 I will take you as my people, and I will be your God. Then you will know that I am Adonai your God, who freed you from the forced labor of the Egyptians. 8 I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Avraham, Yitz’chak and Ya‘akov — I will give it to you as your inheritance. I am Adonai.’”
9 Moshe said this to the people of Isra’el. But they wouldn’t listen to him, because they were so discouraged, and their slavery was so cruel.
10 Adonai said to Moshe, 11 “Go in; and tell Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to let the people of Isra’el leave his land.” 12 Moshe said to Adonai, “Look, the people of Isra’el haven’t listened to me; so how will Pharaoh listen to me, poor speaker that I am?” 13 But Adonai spoke to Moshe and Aharon and gave them orders concerning both the people of Isra’el and Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to bring the people of Isra’el out of the land of Egypt.
---
Today in Jewish History:
• Shimon Born (1567 BCE)
Shimon, the second son of Jacob and Leah and the progenitor of the Israelite tribe of Shimon, was born on Tevet 21 (according to another opinion, on Tevet 28), of the year 2194 from creation (1567 BCE), nine years after Jacob's arrival in Charan.
Link: More on Shimon
Daily Quote: Just as a bride comes to her groom beautiful, bejeweled and perfumed, so does the Shabbat come to the people of Israel. Just as the groom dresses in his finest raiment to receive his bride, so does the Jew receive the Shabbat. Just as a groom is pampered and absolved from working all his nuptial days, so is the Jew on Shabbat (Midrash)
Daily Torah Study:
Chumash: Va'eira, 2nd Portion Exodus 6:14-6:28 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Exodus Chapter 6
14These [following] are the heads of the fathers' houses: The sons of Reuben, Israel's firstborn: Enoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Karmi, these are the families of Reuben. ידאֵ֖לֶּה רָאשֵׁ֣י בֵֽית־אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּנֵ֨י רְאוּבֵ֜ן בְּכֹ֣ר יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל חֲנ֤וֹךְ וּפַלּוּא֙ חֶצְרֹ֣ן וְכַרְמִ֔י אֵ֖לֶּה מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת רְאוּבֵֽן:
These [following] are the heads of the fathers’ houses: Since [Scripture] had to trace the lineage of the tribe of Levi as far as Moses and Aaron-because of Moses and Aaron-it commenced to trace their [the Israelites’] lineage in the order of their births, starting with Reuben. (In the Great Pesikta [Rabbathi] (7:7) I saw [the following statement]: Because Jacob rebuked [the progenitors of] these three tribes at the time of his death (Gen. 49:4-7), Scripture again traces their lineage here by themselves, to infer that [even though Jacob rebuked them] they are of high esteem.)
אלה ראשי בית אבתם: מתוך שהוזקק ליחס שבטו של לוי עד משה ואהרן, בשביל משה ואהרן התחיל ליחסם דרך תולדותם מראובן. [ובפסיקתא רבתי ראיתי לפי שקנטרם יעקב אביהם לשלשה שבטים הללו בשעת מותו, חזר הכתוב ויחסם כאן לבדם לומר שחשובים הם]:
15And the sons of Simeon: Jemuel and Jamin and Ohad and Jachin and Zohar and Saul, the son of the Canaanitess, these are the families of Simeon. טווּבְנֵ֣י שִׁמְע֗וֹן יְמוּאֵ֨ל וְיָמִ֤ין וְאֹ֨הַד֙ וְיָכִ֣ין וְצֹ֔חַר וְשָׁא֖וּל בֶּן־הַכְּנַֽעֲנִ֑ית אֵ֖לֶּה מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת שִׁמְעֽוֹן:
16And these are the names of Levi's sons after their generations: Gershon, Kehath, and Merari, and the years of Levi's life were one hundred thirty seven years. טזוְאֵ֨לֶּה שְׁמ֤וֹת בְּנֵֽי־לֵוִי֙ לְתֹ֣לְדֹתָ֔ם גֵּֽרְשׁ֕וֹן וּקְהָ֖ת וּמְרָרִ֑י וּשְׁנֵי֙ חַיֵּ֣י לֵוִ֔י שֶׁ֧בַע וּשְׁלשִׁ֛ים וּמְאַ֖ת שָׁנָֽה:
and the years of Levi’s life: Why were Levi’s years counted? To let us know how many were the years of bondage. For as long as one of the tribes was alive, there was no bondage, as it is said: “Now Joseph died, as well as all his brothers,” and afterwards, “A new king arose” (Exod. 1:6, 8), and Levi outlived them all. — [from Seder Olam, ch. 3]
ושני חיי לוי וגו': למה נמנו שנותיו של לוי, להודיע כמה ימי השעבוד, שכל זמן שאחד מן השבטים קיים לא היה שעבוד, שנאמר (שמות א ו) וימת יוסף וכל אחיו, ואחר כך (שם ח) ויקם מלך חדש, ולוי האריך ימים על כולם:
17The sons of Gershon: Libni and Shimei to their families. יזבְּנֵ֥י גֵֽרְשׁ֛וֹן לִבְנִ֥י וְשִׁמְעִ֖י לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָֽם:
18And the sons of Kehath were Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, and the years of Kehath's life were one hundred thirty three years. יחוּבְנֵ֣י קְהָ֔ת עַמְרָ֣ם וְיִצְהָ֔ר וְחֶבְר֖וֹן וְעֻזִּיאֵ֑ל וּשְׁנֵי֙ חַיֵּ֣י קְהָ֔ת שָׁל֧שׁ וּשְׁלשִׁ֛ים וּמְאַ֖ת שָׁנָֽה:
And the years of Kehath's life and the years of Amram's life etc: From this calculation we learn that the 400 year sojourn of the B'nei Yisrael which Scriptures talks about, it was not [spent] in Egypt alone but, rather [was calculated] from the day Yitzchok was born. [This can be calculated thus:] For Kehath was among those who went down to Egypt, [Now] calculate all his years and the years of Amram, [his son] and the eighty years of Moshe, you will find that they do not total 400 years, many of the [sons'] years are included in the fathers' years
ושני חיי קהת ושני חיי עמרם וגו': מחשבון זה אנו למדים על מושב בני ישראל ארבע מאות שנה שאמר הכתוב, שלא בארץ מצרים לבדה היו, אלא מיום שנולד יצחק, שהרי קהת מיורדי מצרים היה, חשוב כל שנותיו ושנות עמרם ושמונים של משה לא תמצאם ארבע מאות שנה, והרבה שנים נבלעים לבנים בשני האבות:
19And the sons of Merari were Mahli and Mushi; these are the families of the Levites according to their generations. יטוּבְנֵ֥י מְרָרִ֖י מַחְלִ֣י וּמוּשִׁ֑י אֵ֛לֶּה מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הַלֵּוִ֖י לְתֹֽלְדֹתָֽם:
20Amram took Jochebed, his aunt, as his wife, and she bore him Aaron and Moses, and the years of Amram's life were one hundred thirty seven years. כוַיִּקַּ֨ח עַמְרָ֜ם אֶת־יוֹכֶ֤בֶד דֹּֽדָתוֹ֙ ל֣וֹ לְאִשָּׁ֔ה וַתֵּ֣לֶד ל֔וֹ אֶת־אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן וְאֶת־משֶׁ֑ה וּשְׁנֵי֙ חַיֵּ֣י עַמְרָ֔ם שֶׁ֧בַע וּשְׁלשִׁ֛ים וּמְאַ֖ת שָׁנָֽה:
Jochebed, his aunt: Heb. דֹדָתוֹ [Onkelos renders:] his father’s sister, the daughter of Levi, the sister of Kehath.
יוכבד דדתו: אחת אבוהי בת לוי אחות קהת:
21And the sons of Izhar were Korah and Nepheg and Zichri. כאוּבְנֵ֖י יִצְהָ֑ר קֹ֥רַח וָנֶ֖פֶג וְזִכְרִֽי:
22And the sons of Uzziel were Mishael, Elzaphan, and Sithri. כבוּבְנֵ֖י עֻזִּיאֵ֑ל מִֽישָׁאֵ֥ל וְאֶלְצָפָ֖ן וְסִתְרִֽי:
23Aaron took to himself for a wife, Elisheba, the daughter of Amminadab, the sister of Nahshon, and she bore him Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. כגוַיִּקַּ֨ח אַֽהֲרֹ֜ן אֶת־אֱלִישֶׁ֧בַע בַּת־עַמִּֽינָדָ֛ב אֲח֥וֹת נַחְשׁ֖וֹן ל֣וֹ לְאִשָּׁ֑ה וַתֵּ֣לֶד ל֗וֹ אֶת־נָדָב֙ וְאֶת־אֲבִיה֔וּא אֶת־אֶלְעָזָ֖ר וְאֶת־אִֽיתָמָֽר:
the sister of Nahshon: From here we learn that one who contemplates taking a wife must [first] investigate her brothers. — [from B.B. 110a, Exod. Rabbah 7:5]
אחות נחשון: מכאן למדנו הנושא אשה צריך לבדוק באחיה:
24And the sons of Korah were Assir, Elkanah and Abiasaph; these are the families of the Korahites. כדוּבְנֵ֣י קֹ֔רַח אַסִּ֥יר וְאֶלְקָנָ֖ה וַֽאֲבִֽיאָסָ֑ף אֵ֖לֶּה מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הַקָּרְחִֽי:
25Eleazar, the son of Aaron, took himself [one] of the daughters of Putiel to himself as a wife, and she bore him Phinehas; these are the heads of the fathers' [houses] of the Levites according to their families. כהוְאֶלְעָזָ֨ר בֶּן־אַֽהֲרֹ֜ן לָֽקַח־ל֨וֹ מִבְּנ֤וֹת פּֽוּטִיאֵל֙ ל֣וֹ לְאִשָּׁ֔ה וַתֵּ֥לֶד ל֖וֹ אֶת־פִּֽינְחָ֑ס אֵ֗לֶּה רָאשֵׁ֛י אֲב֥וֹת הַֽלְוִיִּ֖ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָֽם:
[one] of the daughters of Putiel-: Of the seed of Jethro, who fattened (פִּטֵּ ם) calves for idolatry (see Rashi on Exod. 2:16) and [who was also] of the seed of Joseph, who defied and fought (פִּטְפֵּט) against his passion [when he was tempted by Potiphar’s wife]. — [from B.B. 109b]
מבנות פוטיאל: מזרע יתרו שפטם עגלים לעבודה זרה. ומזרע יוסף שפטפט ביצרו:
26That is Aaron and Moses, to whom the Lord said, "Take the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt with their legions." כוה֥וּא אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן וּמשֶׁ֑ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר אָמַ֤ר יְהֹוָה֙ לָהֶ֔ם הוֹצִ֜יאוּ אֶת־בְּנֵ֧י יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם עַל־צִבְאֹתָֽם:
That is Aaron and Moses: Who are mentioned above [verse 20], whom Jochebed bore to Amram, [these two] are [the same] Aaron and Moses to whom the Lord said, etc. In some places, [Scripture] places Aaron before Moses, and in other places it places Moses before Aaron, to tell us that they were equal. — [from Mechilta, 7:1]
הוא אהרן ומשה: אלו שהוזכרו למעלה, שילדה יוכבד לעמרם, הוא אהרן ומשה. יש מקומות שמקדים אהרן למשה ויש מקומות שמקדים משה לאהרן, לומר לך ששקולין כאחד:
with their legions: Heb. ע ַל-צִבְאֹתָם [equivalent to בְּ צִ בְאֹתָם], with their legions. [I.e.,] all their legions according to their tribes. There are [examples] of עַל when it is used instead of one letter, [e.g.,] “you shall live by your sword (עַל-חַרְבְּ) ” (Gen. 27:40), [which is] the same as בְּחַרְבְּ [by your own sword]; You stood by your sword (עַל-חַרְבְּכֶם) (Ezek. 33:26), [which is the same as] בְּחַרְבְּכֶם
על צבאתם: בצבאותם, כל צבאם לשבטיהם. יש על שאינו אלא במקום אות אחת (בראשית כז מ) ועל חרבך תחיה, כמו בחרבך, (יחזקאל לג כו) עמדתם על חרבכם, כמו בחרבכם:
27They are the ones who spoke to Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, to let the children of Israel out of Egypt; they are Moses and Aaron. כזהֵ֗ם הַֽמְדַבְּרִים֙ אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֣ה מֶֽלֶךְ־מִצְרַ֔יִם לְהוֹצִ֥יא אֶת־בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מִמִּצְרָ֑יִם ה֥וּא משֶׁ֖ה וְאַֽהֲרֹֽן:
They are the ones who spoke, etc: [It was] they [who] are the ones who were commanded, and they are the ones who fulfilled [what they had been commanded to do, i.e., speak to Pharaoh].
הם המדברים וגו': הם שנצטוו הם שקיימו:
they are Moses and Aaron: They remained in their mission and in their righteousness from beginning to end. — [from Meg. 11a]
הוא משה ואהרן: הם בשליחותם ובצדקתם מתחלה ועד סוף:
28Now it came to pass on the day that the Lord spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt, כחוַיְהִ֗י בְּי֨וֹם דִּבֶּ֧ר יְהֹוָ֛ה אֶל־משֶׁ֖ה בְּאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם:
Now it came to pass on the day that the Lord spoke, etc.: [This is] connected with the following verse: [“That the Lord spoke to Moses”].
ויהי ביום דבר וגו': מחובר למקרא שלאחריו:
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 104 - 105
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 104
This psalm tells of the beauty of creation, describing that which was created on each of the six days of creation. It proclaims the awesomeness of God Who sustains it all-from the horns of the wild ox to the eggs of the louse.
1. My soul, bless the Lord! Lord my God, You are greatly exalted; You have garbed Yourself with majesty and splendor.
2. You enwrap [Yourself] with light as with a garment; You spread the heavens as a curtain.
3. He roofs His heavens with water; He makes the clouds His chariot, He moves [them] on the wings of the wind.
4. He makes the winds His messengers, the blazing fire His servants.
5. He established the earth on its foundations, that it shall never falter.
6. The depths covered it as a garment; the waters stood above the mountains.
7. At Your exhortation they fled; at the sound of Your thunder they rushed away.
8. They ascended mountains, they flowed down valleys, to the place which You have assigned for them.
9. You set a boundary which they may not cross, so that they should not return to engulf the earth.
10. He sends forth springs into streams; they flow between the mountains.
11. They give drink to all the beasts of the field; the wild animals quench their thirst.
12. The birds of the heavens dwell beside them; they raise their voice from among the foliage.
13. He irrigates the mountains from His clouds above; the earth is satiated from the fruit of Your works.
14. He makes grass grow for the cattle, and vegetation requiring the labor of man to bring forth food from the earth;
15. and wine that gladdens man's heart, oil that makes the face shine, and bread that sustains man's heart.
16. The trees of the Lord drink their fill, the cedars of Lebanon which He planted,
17. wherein birds build their nests; the stork has her home in the cypress.
18. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the rabbits.
19. He made the moon to calculate the festivals; the sun knows its time of setting.
20. You bring on darkness and it is night, when all the beasts of the forest creep forth.
21. The young lions roar for prey, and seek their food from God.
22. When the sun rises, they return and lie down in their dens.
23. Then man goes out to his work, to his labor until evening.
24. How manifold are Your works, O Lord! You have made them all with wisdom; the earth is full of Your possessions.
25. This sea, vast and wide, where there are countless creeping creatures, living things small and great;
26. there ships travel, there is the Leviathan that You created to frolic therein.
27. They all look expectantly to You to give them their food at the proper time.
28. When You give it to them, they gather it; when You open Your hand, they are satiated with goodness.
29. When You conceal Your countenance, they are terrified; when You take back their spirit, they perish and return to their dust.
30. When You will send forth Your spirit they will be created anew, and You will renew the face of the earth.
31. May the glory of the Lord be forever; may the Lord find delight in His works.
32. He looks at the earth, and it trembles; He touches the mountains, and they smoke.
33. I will sing to the Lord with my soul; I will chant praise to my God with my [entire] being.
34. May my prayer be pleasant to Him; I will rejoice in the Lord.
35. May sinners cease from the earth, and the wicked be no more. Bless the Lord, O my soul! Praise the Lord!
Chapter 105
When David brought the Holy Ark up to the City of David, he composed this psalm and sang it before the Ark. He recounts all the miracles that God performed for the Jews in Egypt: sending before them Joseph, who was imprisoned, only to be liberated by God, eventually attaining the status of one who could imprison the princes of Egypt without consulting Pharaoh.
1. Offer praise to the Lord, proclaim His Name; make His deeds known among the nations.
2. Sing to Him, chant praises to Him, speak of all His wonders.
3. Glory in His holy Name; may the heart of those who seek the Lord rejoice.
4. Search for the Lord and His might; seek His countenance always.
5. Remember the wonders that He has wrought, His miracles, and the judgements of His mouth.
6. O descendants of Abraham His servant, children of Jacob, His chosen ones:
7. He is the Lord our God; His judgements extend over the entire earth.
8. He remembers His covenant forever, the word which He has commanded to a thousand generations;
9. the covenant which He made with Abraham, and His oath to Isaac.
10. He established it for Jacob as a statute, for Israel as an everlasting covenant,
11. stating, "To you I shall give the land of Canaan"-the portion of your inheritance,
12. when they were but few, very few, and strangers in it.
13. They wandered from nation to nation, from one kingdom to another people.
14. He permitted no one to wrong them, and admonished kings for their sake:
15. "Do not touch My anointed ones, and do not harm My prophets.”
16. He called for a famine upon the land; He broke every source of bread.
17. He sent a man before them; Joseph was sold as a slave.
18. They afflicted his foot with chains, his soul was put into iron;
19. until the time that His words came, the decree of the Lord purified him.
20. The king sent [word] and released him, the ruler of nations set him free.
21. He appointed him master of his house and ruler of all his possessions,
22. to imprison his princes at will, and to enlighten his elders.
23. Thus Israel came to Egypt, and Jacob sojourned in the land of Ham (Egypt).
24. He multiplied His nation greatly, and made it mightier than its adversaries.
25. He turned their hearts to hate His nation, to conspire against His servants.
26. He sent Moses, His servant; Aaron, whom He had chosen.
27. They placed among them the words of His signs, miracles in the land of Ham.
28. He sent darkness and made it dark, and they did not defy His word.
29. He transformed their waters to blood, and killed their fish.
30. Their land swarmed with frogs in the chambers of their kings.
31. He spoke, and hordes of wild beasts came, and lice throughout their borders.
32. He turned their rains to hail, flaming fire in their land;
33. it struck their vine and fig tree, it broke the trees of their borders.
34. He spoke, and grasshoppers came, locusts without number;
35. and it consumed all grass in their land, it ate the fruit of their soil.
36. Then He smote every firstborn in their land, the first of all their potency.
37. And He took them out with silver and gold, and none among His tribes stumbled.
38. Egypt rejoiced at their leaving, for the fear [of Israel] had fallen upon them.
39. He spread out a cloud for shelter, and a fire to illuminate the night.
40. [Israel] asked, and He brought quail, and with the bread of heaven He satisfied them.
41. He opened a rock and waters flowed; they streamed through dry places like a river,
42. for He remembered His holy word to Abraham His servant.
43. And He brought out His nation with joy, His chosen ones with song.
44. He gave them the lands of nations, they inherited the toil of peoples,
45. so that they might keep His statutes and observe His laws. Praise the Lord!
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 14
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Monday, Tevet 21, 5778 · January 8, 2018
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 14
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
In previous chapters the Alter Rebbe explained that though the Beinoni is unsullied by sin in thought, speech or action, the internal evil of his animal soul remains strong enough to desire evil. That these desires do not find any practical expression is due only to the divine soul’s restraining them, with the aid given it by the Almighty. The Alter Rebbe now continues:
והנה מדת הבינוני היא מדת כל אדם ואחריה כל אדם ימשוך
Now, the rank of Beinoni is one that is attainable by every man; each person should strive after it if he has not yet attained it, and should not think it beyond his reach,
שכל אדם יכול להיות בינוני בכל עת ובכל שעה
for every person can, at any time or hour, be a Beinoni,
כי הבינוני אינו מואס ברע
because a Beinoni does not abhor evil; unlike the tzaddik, he does not find worldly pleasures revolting and loathsome.
שזהו דבר המסור ללב
For this is a matter entrusted to the heart, and as explained earlier, the Beinoni has yet to conquer [the evil in] his heart; consequently, he does not loathe evil.
ולא כל העתים שוות
Also, not all times are alike.
There are times — such as during prayer — when one’s heart is open and receptive; at such time he may evoke a loathing towards evil. At other times the heart may be “blocked” and spiritually insensitive, and one is incapable of loathing evil.
Inasmuch as the Beinoni’s attitude towards evil varies, while his status of Beinoni remains constant, it is understood that loathing evil is not the measure of the Beinoni.
אלא סור מרע ועשה טוב דהיינו בפועל ממש במעשה דבור ומחשבה
Rather, the task of the Beinoni is only to “turn away from evil and do good,” in actual practice — in deed, speech and thought.
שבהם הבחירה והיכולת והרשות נתונה לכל אדם
In these matters, as opposed to “matters of the heart,” every man is given the choice, ability and freedom
לעשות ולדבר ולחשוב גם מה שהוא נגד תאות לבו והפכה ממש
to act, speak and think even that which is contrary to the desire of his heart and diametrically opposed to it.
כי גם בשעה שהלב חומד ומתאוה איזו תאוה גשמיית בהיתר, או באיסור חס ושלום
For even when one’s heart craves and desires a material pleasure, whether permitted, in which case it is only the lustful nature of the desire that is evil (instead of desiring the pleasure “for the sake of heaven,” as he should, he seeks self-gratification), or whether, G‑d forbid, he desires that which is forbidden, and the desire is intrinsically evil; whatever sort of craving it is —
יכול להתגבר ולהסיח דעתו ממנה לגמרי, באמרו ללבו
he can conquer [this desire] and divert his attention from it altogether, by declaring to himself(“saying to his heart”) [as follows]:
אינני רוצה להיות רשע אפילו שעה אחת
“I do not want to be a rasha — in succumbing to the blandishments of the animal soul — even for a moment,
כי אינני רוצה להיות מובדל ונפרד חס ושלום מה׳ אחד בשום אופן, כדכתיב: עונותיכם מבדילים וגו׳
because under no circumstances do I want to be parted and severed, heaven forbid, from the One G‑d; as is written,1 “Your iniquities separate. [you from G‑d].”
By reflecting that sin separates one from G‑d, one will conclude that he does not wish to be a rasha, since he will thereby sever his bond with Him. In this way, one can always “turn away form evil” and refrain from sin although his heart craves it.
Similarly, in order for one to “do good” and actively perform the mitzvot, he should declare to himself:
רק אני רוצה לדבקה בו נפשי רוחי ונשמתי, בהתלבשן בשלשה לבושיו יתברך
“I desire, instead, to unite my Nefesh, Ruach and Neshamah with G‑d through investing them in ‘His’ three garments,
שהם מעשה דבור ומחשבה בה׳ ותורתו ומצותיו
namely, action, speech and thought dedicated to G‑d, His Torah and His commandments.
These are called “His” (G‑d’s) three garments because they lend expression to His wisdom (Torah) and Will (mitzvot), which are one with G‑d Himself.
מאהבה מסותרת שבלבי לה׳, כמו בלב כללות ישראל שנקראו אוהבי שמך
“This desire to unite with G‑d arises out of the love of G‑d that is (surely) hidden in my heart though I do not feel it, just as [this love is found] in the heart of all Jews, who are called2 ‘lovers of Your(G‑d’s) Name’ by reason of their inherent love of G‑d, although they do not all feel this love consciously.
ואפילו קל שבקלים יכול למסור נפשו על קדושת ה׳, ולא נופל אנכי ממנו בודאי
“For this reason, even a kal shebekalim (a most unworthy Jew) is capable of sacrificing his life for the sanctity of G‑d should he be forced to deny Him, G‑d forbid. Surely I am not inferior to him.
As will be explained in later chapters, the ability of even the lowliest Jew to give up his very life for G‑d stems from every Jew’s innate, hidden love of G‑d, which is activated and aroused whenever he feels that he is being torn away from Him. But if the kal shebekalim does indeed love G‑d so deeply that he will surrender his life for Him, why is he a kal shebekalim? Why does he sin? Why does he not observe the mitzvot?
אלא שנכנס בו רוח שטות, ונדמה לו שבעבירה זו עודנו ביהדותו, ואין נשמתו מובדלת מאלקי ישראל
“It is only that a spirit of folly has overcome (lit., ‘entered’) him, as our Sages say:3 ‘No man sins unless overcome by a spirit of folly’; he imagines that committing this sin will not affect his Jewishness, and that his soul will not be severed thereby from the G‑d of Israel.
In fact, at the moment that a Jew sins he becomes separated from G‑d. Were the kal shebekalim to realize this, he would never sin. The “spirit of folly,” however, deludes him into thinking otherwise.
וגם שוכח אהבתו לה׳ המסותרת בלבו
“Similarly, the kal shebekalim neglects the positive mitzvot, although his natural love of G‑d dictates that he fulfill them, because he also forgets the love of G‑d hidden in his heart. Were he aware of this love, he would seek out mitzvot to perform in order to unite with G‑d.
אבל אני אינני רוצה להיות שוטה כמוהו לכפור האמת
All this applies to the kal shebekalim. “But as for me — one should say to himself — I have no desire to be such a fool as he, to deny the truth!”
For the truth of the matter is that sin does separate man from G‑d, and that one does have a natural love of G‑d that dictates the performance of mitzvot. “These truths,” one must say to himself, “I do not wish to deny.”
Such arguments are effective in a conflict with one’s animal soul over actual thought, speech and action. Using the above-mentioned reasoning one can prevail over his evil inclination at all times (in both “turning from evil” and “doing good”), and thereby attain the rank of the Beinoni.
מה שאין כן בדבר המסור ללב, דהיינו שיהא הרע מאוס ממש בלב ושנאוי
It is different, however, with something entrusted to the heart, i.e., involving one’s feelings,meaning, in our case, that one’s heart actually abhor and despise the evil that he now craves,
בתכלית שנאה, או אפילו שלא בתכלית שנאה
[whether] with absolute hatred as the perfect tzaddik does, or even not quite so utterly, as does the “incomplete tzaddik.”
הנה זה אי אפשר שיהיה באמת לאמיתו אלא על ידי גודל ותוקף האהבה לה׳, בבחינת אהבה בתענוגים להתענג על ה׳
This cannot be attained in complete truth except through that level of intense love of G‑d called “love of delights,” which consists of delighting in G‑dliness,
מעין עולם הבא
akin to [the bliss of] the World to Come, concerning which our Sages say that souls “will bask in the radiance of the Divine Presence.” Only such “love of delights” creates a hatred of evil, as explained in the previous chapters.
ועל זה אמרו רז״ל: עולמך תראה בחייך כו׳, ואין כל אדם זוכה לזה כי זה כעין קבול שכר
Concerning one who experiences this [“love of delights”] our Sages said,4 “You shall see a glimmer of your reward in the World to Come in your lifetime.” Not every man is privileged to attain this state, for it is in the nature of a reward received from above, and a reward can only be received, not taken.
וכדכתיב: עבודת מתנה אתן את כהונתכם וגו׳
Thus it is written,5 “I (G‑d) will make your priestly office a rewarding service,”
Service of G‑d with this ecstatically blissful love is designated “priesthood” even though it is not restricted to the Kohanim, members of the priestly family of Aaron. The above-quoted verse tells us that this lofty level of divine service is a gift from G‑d,
כמו שכתוב במקום אחר
as is explained elsewhere.6
Consequently, the rank of tzaddik is not within every man’s reach: it is dependent upon one’s loathing of evil, which is in turn contingent on his experiencing that blissful love which is a gift from G‑d. The level of Beinoni,however, is attainable by all.
With this in mind, the Alter Rebbe clarifies the Talmudic passage that describes Job as saying to G‑d: “You have created tzaddikim (righteous men), and You have created resha‘im (wicked men).” In the first chapter of Tanya the Alter Rebbe asked: How can G‑d be said to have “created” righteous and wicked men? If man is wicked, it is his own doing. G‑d ordains only whether one shall be clever or foolish, strong or weak, and the like; he does not declare whether one will be righteous or wicked, for doing so would negate man’s freedom of choice. How, then, could Job say, “You have created men as tzaddikim and resha’im?”
The matter becomes clear, however, in light of the Alter Rebbe’s statement here that the ability to become a tzaddik is a gift from G‑d, not granted to every man. “You have created tzaddikim” thus means that G‑d created souls capable of attaining the rank of tzaddik. In the Alter Rebbe’s words:
ולכן אמר איוב: בראת צדיקים כו׳
Therefore did Job say, “You created tzaddikim….”
We can now understand Job’s statement as a reference to those souls created with the capacity of attaining the rank of tzaddik. (The meaning of “You have created resha‘im” is explained in ch. 27.)
וכדאיתא בתיקונים, שיש בנשמות ישראל כמה מיני מדרגות ובחינות
As stated in Tikkunei Zohar,7 there are many grades and degrees in Jewish souls:
חסידים, גבורים המתגברים על יצרם, מארי תורה, נביאים כו׳, צדיקים כו׳, עיין שם
Pious men (“chassidim”), strong men (“gibborim”) who gain mastery over their evil inclination, scholars of the Torah, prophets,...tzaddikim, and so forth. Note there.
Accordingly, within the ranks of the souls there are those who are categorized as tzaddikim.8
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Yeshayahu 59:2. |
| 2. | Tehillim 5:12. |
| 3. | Sotah 3a. |
| 4. | Berachot 17a. |
| 5. | Bamidbar 18:7. |
| 6. | See further, ch. 43. |
| 7. | Introduction to Tikkunei Zohar 1b. |
| 8. | This appears to be the Alter Rebbe’s intention in citing Tikkunei Zohar. However, the Rebbe remarks: “This bears examination.” Possibly, the Rebbe is implying doubt as to whether the Alter Rebbe understands the mention of tzaddikim in Tikkunei Zohar as referring to those souls born with the capacity to become tzaddikim,since the other qualities mentioned there — especially those that characterize the “gibborim, who prevail with might over their Yetzer Hara” — are not hereditary, but are attained by dint of one’s efforts. On the other hand, “gibborim” may refer to souls that are inherently inclined toward Gevurah, as are “chassidim” toward Chesed,and so on. |
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassMonday, Tevet 21, 5778 · January 8, 2018
Today's Mitzvah
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 148
Sending Away the Mother Bird
"You shall surely send away the mother, and the children you may take for yourself"—Deuteronomy 22:7.
We are commanded to send away the mother bird before taking its young.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
Sending Away the Mother Bird
Positive Commandment 148
Translated by Berel Bell
The 148th mitzvah is that we are commanded regarding shiluach hakan ("sending away the nest").1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "You must first chase away the mother, and only then may you take the young."
The details of this commandment are fully explained in the last chapter of Chullin.
FOOTNOTES
1.Rather than taking both the mother bird and the chicks (or eggs), we are commanded to chase away the mother and only thereafter take the young.
2.Deut. 22:7.
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter A Day: Milah Milah - Chapter Three
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassMilah - Chapter Three
1
Before the circumcision, the person who performs the circumcision recites the blessing, "[Blessed are You...] who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us concerning the circumcision." [This applies] when circumcising the son of another person.1 When circumcising one's own son, one should recite the blessing "... to circumcise a son."2
[At the circumcision,]3 the father of the child recites another blessing:
Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to have our children enter the covenant of Abraham, our Patriarch.4
[This blessing was instituted because] it is a greater mitzvah for a father to circumcise his son than for the Jewish people as a whole to circumcise the uncircumcised among them. Therefore, if a child's father is not present, this blessing should not be recited. There are those who have ruled that the court or one of the people [in attendance should recite this blessing in the father's absence]. [Nevertheless, this ruling] should not be followed.5
א
המל מברך קודם שימול אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על המילה אם מל בן חבירו ואם מל את בנו מברך וצונו למול את הבן ואבי הבן מברך ברכה אחרת ברוך אתה יי' אלהינו מלך העולם אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להכניסו בבריתו של אברהם אבינו מצוה על האב למול את בנו יתר על מצוה שמצווין ישראל שימולו כל ערל שביניהן לפיכך אם אין שם אביו אין מברכין אחריה ברכה זו ויש מי שהורה שיברכו אותה בית דין או אחד מן העם ואין ראוי לעשות כן:
2
If others are present,6 they say: "Just as you have brought him into the covenant,7 so, too, may you bring him to Torah, marriage, and good deeds."8
ב
ואם היו שם עומדין אומרים כשם שהכנסתו לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה ולמעשים טובים:
3
Afterwards, the father of the child, the person who performed the circumcision, or one of the people in attendance should recite the [following] blessing:
Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified the cherished from the womb, affixed his covenant in his flesh, and sealed his descendants with the sign of the holy covenant. Therefore, as a reward for this [circumcision], living God, our Portion, our Rock, has ordained that the beloved of our flesh be saved from the abyss for the sake of His covenant that He has set in our flesh. Blessed are You, God, who establishes the covenant.
The father of the son recites the blessing shehecheyanu.
ג
ואח"כ מברך אבי הבן או המל או אחד מן העומדין שם ברוך אתה יי' אלהינו מלך העולם אשר קידש ידיד מבטן וחוק בשארו שם וצאצאיו חתם באות ברית קדש על כן בשכר זאת אל חי חלקנו צורנו צוה להציל ידידות שארנו משחת למען בריתו אשר שם בבשרנו ברוך אתה יי' כורת הברית ואבי הבן מברך שהחיינו:
4
When circumcising converts, one should recite the blessing:9
Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to circumcise converts and to extract from them the blood of the covenant,10 for were it not for the blood of the covenant the existence of the heavens and the earth could not be maintained, as [Jeremiah 33:25] states: "Were it not for My covenant, day and night, I would not have established the laws of heaven and earth."
ד
המל את הגרים מברך ברוך אתה יי' אלהינו מלך העולם אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו למול את הגרים ולהטיף ממנו דם ברית שאלמלא דם הברית לא נתקיימו שמים וארץ שנאמר אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי:
5
One who circumcises his slave11 recites the blessing:12
[Blessed are You...] who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to circumcise slaves and to extract from them the blood of the covenant, for were it not for the blood of the covenant the existence of the heavens and the earth could not be maintained...."
If one circumcises a slave belonging to someone else, one should [alter the text of] the blessing and say, "[and commanded us] concerning the circumcision of slaves [and...]13
When circumcising an adult male, one must cover his sexual organ until after the blessing is recited.14 Afterwards, one reveals it and performs the circumcision.
ה
המל את עבדו מברך אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו למול את העבדים ולהטיף מהן דם ברית שאלמלא דם ברית לא נתקיימו שמים וארץ ואם מל עבד של אחרים מברך על מילת העבדים והמל אדם גדול צריך לכסות ערותו עד שיברך ואחר כך מגלהו ומל אותו:
6
When the blood of circumcision is extracted from a convert who had been circumcised before conversion, or from a child who was born without a foreskin, there is no necessity to recite a blessing.15 Similarly, a blessing is not recited over the circumcision of an androgynous, because he is not definitely categorized as a male.16
ו
גר שמל קודם שנתגייר וקטן שנולד כשהוא מהול כשמטיפין ממנו דם ברית אינן צריכין ברכה וכן אנדרוגינוס אין מברכין על מילתו מפני שהוא אינו זכר ודאי:
7
It is forbidden for a Jew to circumcise a gentile who is forced to remove his foreskin because of a wound or because of a tumor, since we are instructed neither to save the gentiles from death, nor to cause them to die.17 Although a mitzvah is accomplished in the process of administering this medical treatment, the gentile did not intend to fulfill the mitzvah. If, however, the gentile intends to fulfill the mitzvah of circumcision, it is a mitzvah to circumcise him.18
ז
עכו"ם שצריך לחתך ערלתו מפני מכה או מפני שחין שנולד בו היה אסור לישראל לחתוך לו אותה שהעכו"ם אין מעלים אותם מידי מיתה ולא מורידין אותן אליה אע"פ שנעשית מצוה ברפואה זו שהרי לא נתכוון למצוה לפיכך אם נתכוון העכו"ם למילה מותר לישראל למול אותו:
8
How disgusting is the foreskin that is used as a term of deprecation with regard to the gentiles, as [Jeremiah 9:25] states: "For all the gentiles are uncircumcised!" How great is the circumcision! Behold, our Patriarch Abraham was not called "perfect" until he was circumcised, as [Genesis 17:1-2] states: "Proceed before Me and become perfect. And I will place My covenant between Me and you."19
Anyone who breaks the covenant of Abraham our Patriarch and leaves his foreskin uncircumcised, or [although he was circumcised,]20 causes it to appear extended, does not have a portion in the world to come,21 despite the fact that he has studied Torah and performed good deeds.
ח
מאוסה היא הערלה שנתגנו בה הגוים שנאמר כי כל הגוים ערלים וגדולה היא המילה שלא נקרא אברהם אבינו שלם עד שמל שנאמר התהלך לפני והיה תמים ואתנה בריתי ביני וביניך וגו' וכל המפר בריתו של אברהם אבינו והניח ערלתו או משכה אף על פי שיש בו תורה ומעשים טובים אין לו חלק לעולם הבא:
9
Come and see how severe a matter circumcision is. Moses, our teacher, was not granted even a temporary respite from [fulfilling this mitzvah].22
The Torah mentions only three covenants regarding all its mitzvot, as [Deuteronomy 28:69] states: "These are the words of the covenant that God commanded... in addition to the covenant that He established with you in Chorev." And [Deuteronomy 29:9-11] states: "You are all standing today... to enter into a covenant with God, your Lord." Thus, there are three covenants.
In contrast, thirteen covenants were established with Abraham, our Patriarch, with regard to circumcision:23
"I will place My covenant between Me and you" [Genesis 17:2],
"And I, behold, My covenant is with you" [ibid.:4],
"I will establish My covenant between Me and you" [ibid.:7],
"For an eternal covenant" [ibid.],
"And you shall observe My covenant" [ibid.:9],
"This is My covenant which you shall observe" [ibid.:10],
"It will be a sign of the covenant" [ibid.:11],
"My covenant will be in your flesh" [ibid.:13],
"For an eternal covenant" [ibid.],
"He will have nullified My covenant" [ibid.:14],
"And I will establish My covenant with Him" [ibid.:19],
"For an eternal covenant" [ibid.],
"And I will establish My covenant with Isaac" [ibid.:21].
ט
בא וראה כמה חמורה מילה שלא נתלה למשה רבינו עליה אפילו שעה אחת אף ע"פ שהיה בדרך וכל מצות התורה נכרתו עליהן שלש בריתות שנאמר אלה דברי הברית אשר צוה יי' מלבד הברית אשר כרת אתם בחרב ושם הוא אומר אתם נצבים היום כולכם לעברך בברית יי' אלהיך הרי שלש בריתות ועל המילה נכרתו שלש עשרה בריתות עם אברהם אבינו ואתנה בריתי ביני וביניך אני הנה בריתי אתך והקימתי את בריתי ביני וביניך לברית עולם ואתה את בריתי תשמור זאת בריתי אשר תשמרו והיה לאות ברית והיתה בריתי בבשרכם לברית עולם את בריתי הפר והקימתי את בריתי אתו לברית עולם ואת בריתי אקיר את יצחק:
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
This concludes the second volume with the help of the Almighty. There are a total of 46 chapters in this volume.
Hilchot Kri'at Shema - 4 chapters
Hilchot Tefillah UVirkat Kohanim - 15 chapters
Hilchot Tefillin UMezuzah V'Sefer Torah - 10 chapters
Hilchot Tzitzit - 3 chapters
Hilchot Berachot - 11 chapters
Hilchot Milah - 3 chapters
בריך רחמנא דסייען:
FOOTNOTES
1.
The Rambam's ruling depends on his statement (Hilchot Berachot 11:13) that if someone performs a blessing on behalf of another person, he should use the form "who has sanctified us with Your commandments and commanded us concerning...."
2.
In Hilchot Berachot 11:12, the Rambam states that when one fulfills a mitzvah on one's own behalf, one should use the form "who has sanctified us with Your commandments and commanded us to..."
Although the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 365:2) mentions the Rambam's opinion, the Ramah states that it is customary to recite the blessing "... concerning the circumcision," at all times.
It is possible to explain that the Ramah does not accept the Rambam's general principle and prefers a universal form for a blessing to be recited every time a particular mitzvah is fulfilled. It is, however, also possible to interpret their difference of opinion as relating to the definition of the mitzvah of circumcision itself. The Rambam's text of the blessing, which uses the form "... to...," indicates that the nature of the mitzvah of circumcision focuses on the act of circumcision. In contrast, the Ramah's text for the blessing can be interpreted to imply that the nature of the mitzvah is to bring a person to the state that he is no longer uncircumcised. Therefore, the form "... concerning..." is more appropriate (Kinat Eliyahu).
3.
The time when this blessing is recited is a matter of question. In two of his responsa, the Rambam writes that it makes no difference whether this blessing is recited before the circumcision or afterwards. Nevertheless, Rav Avraham, his son, and Rav Yitzchak, his grandson, state that it was the Rambam's custom to recite this blessing before the mitzvah.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 265:1) quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who states that this blessing should be recited between the milah and the pri'ah.
4.
Tosafot, Pesachim 7a, explain that this blessing is not one of the blessings connected with the performance of a mitzvah, but a blessing that expresses our thanks and appreciation to God for granting us this mitzvah.
5.
The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's decision and rules that, in the absence of the father, the sandak (the person who holds the baby during the circumcision) should recite this blessing. The Ramah (Yoreh De'ah 265:1) quotes this decision.
6.
The literal translation of the Rambam's phraseology is "If others are standing there." The commentaries explain that his intent is also to emphasize that it is necessary to stand while attending a brit. (See the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 265:6, which states that, if possible, it is preferable to perform a circumcision with at least ten adult males in attendance.)
7.
The Rambam's version of this statement is found also in the Jerusalem Talmud (Berachot 9:3) and is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 265:1). At present, however, it is customary to follow Rabbenu Asher's opinion and say, "Just as he has entered the covenant, so may he enter..." without mentioning the father's role. Significantly, this version is found in our texts of Shabbat 137b where this custom is mentioned.
8.
We wish that the merit of the circumcision will lead to a life full of genuine Jewish conduct.
9.
It appears that the Rambam considers this the only blessing recited in connection with the circumcision of converts, and would have this blessing recited before the circumcision. In contrast, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 268:5) explain that two blessings should be recited in connection with the circumcision of a convert:
a) one blessing before the circumcision, "... who has sanctified us... and commanded us to circumcise converts,"
b) one blessing after the circumcision, the blessing quoted by the Rambam with the conclusion, "Blessed are You, God, who establishes a covenant."
According to the Shulchan Aruch's perspective, like the blessing mentioned in the previous halachah, this blessing is not a blessing connected with the performance of the mitzvah, but an expression of praise for God for granting us the opportunity to perform such a unique mitzvah.
According to the Rambam's view, it is somewhat difficult to understand: Why is this blessing so lengthy? In this context, theSefer HaMaor explains that this blessing was instituted to reassure converts and strengthen their resolve before they fulfill a mitzvah that is associated with pain and suffering.
10.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that this is a reference to the extraction of blood from converts who were circumcised previously. Other commentaries object to this interpretation, noting that in Halachah 6, the Rambam does not require a blessing in such an instance.
11.
I.e., when the master performs the circumcision himself.
12.
In this instance as well, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 267:12) rule that two blessings should be recited. See Note 9.
13.
The reason for the change of text depends on the Rambam's statements (Hilchot Berachot 11:11) that a person who performs a blessing on his own behalf should use the form, "who has sanctified us... and commanded us to..." In contrast, one who performs a blessing on behalf of others should use the form, "...and commanded us concerning...."
14.
This is because, as explained in Hilchot Kri'at Shema 3:16, it is forbidden to recite holy words in the presence of an exposed sexual organ.
There is somewhat of a problem, however, with the Rambam's statements. Here, it appears that one need not cover the penis of a baby before reciting the blessing, yet in Hilchot Kri'at Shema (ibid.), the Rambam writes that the Shema may not be recited in the presence of a minor whose sexual organ is exposed.
In one of his responsa, the Rambam resolves this difficulty, explaining that the prohibition begins when the child - either male or female - possesses some sexual potency. (See also Siftei Cohen 265:18.)
15.
In both cases, there is a doubt whether or not it is necessary to perform this circumcision. (See Chapter 1, Halachah 7.) Therefore, the circumcision is performed, but a blessing is not recited, lest there be no obligation to perform this activity, and thus, the blessing would be recited in vain. (See Hilchot Berachot 11:16.)
16.
The Ra'avad contests this point, noting that when there is a doubt whether a certain activity fulfills a mitzvah or not, one should recite a blessing, and cites the recitation of blessings on the second day of festivals in the diaspora as an example of this principle.
Rav Kapach explains that the difference between the Rambam and the Ra'avad depends on their conception of the status of an androgynous. The Ra'avad maintains that an androgynous is considered a male whose status is in doubt. Therefore, since a mitzvah from the Torah is involved, a blessing should be recited. The Rambam maintains that an androgynous is in a category of his own, and the question is whether the obligation to circumcise falls on people in this category. Hence, no blessing is recited. See also their difference of opinion in Hilchot Shofar 2:2.
17.
In Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 10:1-2, the Rambam writes:
If we see an idolater being swept away or drowning in the river, we should not help him. If we see that his life is in danger, we should not save him. It is, however, forbidden to cause one of them to sink or to push him into a pit or the like, since he is not waging war against us....
From the above, we can infer that it is forbidden to offer medical treatment to an idolater even when offered a wage. If, however, one is afraid of the consequences or fears that ill feeling will be aroused, one may treat them for a wage, but to treat them for free is forbidden.
[Regarding] a ger toshav, since we are commanded to secure his well-being, he may be given medical treatment at no cost.
Many authorities maintain that the laws applying to a ger toshav can be applied to all gentiles who are not idolaters. Furthermore, since at present, a doctor would have much difficulty if he refused to treat gentiles, leniency should be shown in this regard.
From the above, it would appear that a doctor who operates a medical practice today is allowed to treat gentile patients. Indeed, throughout the ages, many great Rabbinic authorities, including the Rambam himself, served as doctors to gentiles.
18.
In Hilchot Melachim 10:10, the Rambam writes that a gentile who desires to fulfill any mitzvah should be given the opportunity.
There are other authorities who differ with the Rambam on this matter. They explain that circumcision is a sign given to the Jewish people that establishes their uniqueness and it is improper that gentiles should be given the opportunity of possessing this property.
19.
See the Guide to the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 49, where the Rambam criticizes a hedonistic approach to life and explains that circumcision comes "to complete the perfection of our emotions... to reduce a person's lust and wild cravings."
20.
In the Hellenistic era, there were some Greek sympathizers among the Jewish people who would cause their foreskin to appear extended, so that they would not be distinguished from gentile athletes. The Sages were extremely critical of these individuals.
21.
See Avot 3:11 and Hilchot Teshuvah 3:6.
22.
As Exodus 4:24-26 relates, when Moses returned to Egypt, he took his newborn son, Eliezer, with him. He did not circumcise him immediately and, therefore, an angel came in the form of a snake and swallowed him. Tziporah his wife realized the source of the problem and circumcised her son. After this, the angel retracted. (See Nedarim 32a.)
23.
In the Guide to the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 49, the Rambam writes that the brit is a sign of the covenant of the oneness of God. "When a person is circumcised he enters into the covenant of Abraham which obligates him to know [God's] unity." This covenant of unity defines the nature of the Jewish people. It is natural that when people share a common sign, love and mutual assistance among them grow.
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters A Day: Shechitah Shechitah - Chapter 12, Shechitah Shechitah - Chapter 13, Shechitah Shechitah - Chapter 14
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassShechitah - Chapter 12
1
When a person slaughters an animal and its offspring on the same day, the meat is permitted to be eaten.1 The slaughterer, however, is punished by lashes,2as [Leviticus 22:28] states: "Do not slaughter [an ox or a sheep]3 and its offspring on one day." He receives lashes only for slaughtering the second animal. Accordingly, if one person slaughtered one of such a pair and another person slaughtered the second, [the one who slaughtered the second alone] receives lashes.
א
השוחט אותו ואת בנו ביום אחד הבשר מותר באכילה והשוחט לוקה שנאמר אותו ואת בנו לא תשחטו ביום אחד, ואינו לוקה אלא על שחיטת האחרון, לפיכך אם שחט אחד משניהן ובא חבירו ושחט את השני חבירו לוקה.
2
The prohibition against slaughtering [an animal] and its offspring applies in all times and in all places, with regard to ordinary animals and sacrificial animals. [With regard to the latter category, it applies] with regard to sacrifices of which we partake and with regard to sacrifices of which we do not partake.4 Therefore if one slaughtered the first animal in the Temple courtyard and the second outside of it or the first outside the Temple courtyard and the second inside, the one who slaughtered the second animal receives lashes [for violating the prohibition against slaughtering] an animal and its offspring. [This applies] whether they were both ordinary animals,5 they were both sacrificial animals,6 or one7 was an ordinary animal and one, a sacrificial one.
ב
איסור אותו ואת בנו נוהג בכל זמן ובכל מקום בחולין ובמוקדשין, בין קדשים הנאכלין בין קדשים שאינן נאכלין, לפיכך הראשון ששחט בעזרה והשני בחוץ, או הראשון בחוץ והשני בעזרה, בין שהיו שניהן חולין או שניהן קדשים, בין שהיה אחד מהן חולין ואחד קדשים, זה ששחט אחרון לוקה משום אותו ואת בנו.
3
The prohibition against slaughtering [an animal] and its offspring applies only with regard to ritual slaughter, as the verse states: "Do not slaughter." [Implied] is that the prohibition involves the slaughter of both animals. If, however, one chopped off the head of one of them or it became a nevelah in his hand,8 it is permitted to slaughter [the other]. Similarly, if he slaughtered the first and chopped off the head of the second or it became a nevelah in his hand, he is not liable.
ג
אין איסור אותו ואת בנו נוהג אלא בשחיטה בלבד שנאמר לא תשחטו בשחיטת שניהן הוא האיסור, אבל אם נחר הראשון או נתנבל בידו מותר לשחוט, וכן אם שחט הראשון ונחר השני או נתנבל בידו פטור.
4
When a deaf-mute, an intellectually or emotionally incapable person, or a minor slaughtered the first animal privately,9 it is permitted to slaughter the second animal afterwards because their slaughter is not considered as slaughter.10
ד
חרש שוטה וקטן ששחטו בינם לבין עצמן את הראשון מותר לשחוט שני אחריהם, לפי שאין שחיטתן שחיטה (כלל).
5
When one slaughters the first animal, but a question arises whether it is a nevelah or not, it is forbidden to slaughter the second [animal].11 If one slaughters it, he is not liable for lashes.12
ה
השוחט את הראשון והרי הוא ספק נבלה אסור לשחוט השני, ואם שחטו אינו לוקה.
6
Slaughter from which it is not fit to eat is, nevertheless, considered slaughter. Therefore if the first person slaughtered an ordinary animal in the Temple courtyard,13 one which is trefe, an ox condemned to be stoned, a calf whose neck is to be broken, a red heifer, or slaughtered for the sake of a false deity,14a person who slaughters the second animal is liable. Similarly, if one slaughtered the first animal and another slaughtered the second though it is an ordinary animal in the Temple courtyard, an ox condemned to be stoned, a calf whose neck is to be broken, or a red heifer, [the second person] is liable for lashes.
ו
שחיטה שאינה ראויה לאכילה שמה שחיטה, לפיכך הראשון ששחט חולין בעזרה או טריפה או שור הנסקל ועגלה ערופה ופרה אדומה או ששחט לעכו"ם ובא האחרון ושחט את השני לוקה, וכן אם שחט הראשון את האחד ובא האחרון ושחט את השני והרי הוא חולין בעזרה או שור הנסקל או עגלה ערופה ופרה אדומה הרי זה לוקה.
7
When [the second animal] is slaughtered for the sake of a false deity,15[the slaughterer] is not liable because of [the prohibition against slaughtering] an animal and its offspring, for he is liable for capital punishment.16If, however, he was given a warning for [the prohibition against slaughtering an animal] and its offspring and was not given a warning for the worship of false deities,17 he receives lashes.18
ז
שחטו לעכו"ם פטור משום אותו ואת בנו שהרי נתחייב בנפשו, ואם התרו בו משום אותו ואת בנו ולא התרו בו משום עכו"ם לוקה.
8
The prohibition against slaughtering [an animal] and its offspring applies only with regard to a kosher domesticated animal. [This is derived from the exegesis of Leviticus, loc. cit.]:19 "Do not slaughter [an ox or a sheep] and its offspring on one day."
[This prohibition] does apply with regard to hybrid species. What is implied? When a [male] deer mates with a [female] goat and one slaughters the goat and its offspring, one is liable. When, however, a [male] goat mates with a [female] deer and one slaughters the deer and its offspring, it is forbidden to slaughter [the deer and its offspring], if one slaughters them, however, one is not liable for lashes.20 The Torah forbade slaughtering a cow21 and its offspring and not a deer and its offspring.
ח
אין איסור אותו ואת בנו נוהג אלא בבהמה טהורה בלבד שנאמר ושור או שה אותו ואת בנו לא תשחטו ביום אחד, ונוהג בכלאים, כיצד צבי שבא על העז ושחט העז ואת בנה לוקה, אבל העז שבא על הצביה אסור לשחוט אותה ואת בנה ואם שחט אינו לוקה, פרה ובנה אסרה תורה לא צביה ובנה.
9
If the offspring of this deer was female and it gave birth to offspring, one is liable for lashes should he slaughter the female offspring of this deer and its offspring [on the same day].22 Similarly, if a hybrid species is produced by mating a sheep and a goat - regardless of which is male and which is female - [the slaughterer can be held liable for] lashes for [violating the prohibition against slaughtering] an animal and its offspring.
ט
היתה בת הצביה הזאת נקבה וילדה בן ושחט את הנקבה בת הצביה ואת בנה לוקה, וכן כלאים הבא ממין כבש וממין עז בין מכבש עם העז בין מעז עם הכבשה לוקה משום אותו ואת בנו.
10
It is permitted to slaughter a pregnant animal. The fetus is considered as a limb of its mother.23 If the fetus emerged alive after the slaughter of its mother and stepped on the ground,24 one should not slaughter it on the same day. If one did, one is not liable for lashes.25
י
מותר לשחוט את המעוברת עובר ירך אמו הוא, ואם יצא העובר חי אחר שחיטה והפריס על גבי קרקע אין שוחטין אותו ביום אחד ואם שחט אינו לוקה.
11
The prohibition against slaughtering [an animal] and its offspring applies with regard to a mother, for the offspring is certainly its own. If one knows with certainty that a male fathered offspring, the two should not be slaughtered on the same day. If one slaughtered [them together, however,] he is not liable for lashes, for there is a doubt whether or not the prohibition applies with regard to males.26
יא
איסור אותו ואת בנו נוהג בנקבות שזה בנה ודאי, ואם נודע ודאי שזה הוא אביו אין שוחטין שניהן ביום אחד ואם שחט אינו לוקה, שהדבר ספק אם נוהג בזכרים או אינו נוהג.
12
When a person slaughters a cow and afterwards slaughters two of its offspring, he is liable for two sets of lashes.27 If he slaughters [several of] its offspring and then it, he is liable for [only] one set of lashes.28 If he slaughtered it, its female offspring and the offspring of its offspring, he is liable for two sets of lashes.29 If he slaughtered it, the offspring of its offspring and its female offspring, he is liable for [only] one set of lashes.30
יב
השוחט את הפרה ואחר כך שחט שני בניה לוקה שתי מלקיות, שחט את בניה ואחר כך שחט היא לוקה אחת, שחטה ואת בתה ואת בן בתה לוקה שתים, שחטה ואת בן בתה ואחר כך שחט את הבת לוקה אחת בין הוא בין אחר.
13
When two people [each] purchased an animal: one the mother and one the offspring and they brought the matter for judgment,31 the one who purchased [the animal] first is allowed to slaughter it first,32 the other one should wait until the next day. If the second purchaser slaughtered [his animal] first, he gains and the first must wait until the next day.
יג
שנים שלקחו שתי בהמות זה האם וזה הבת ובאו לדין, זה שלקח ראשון ישחוט ראשון והשני ימתין למחר, ואם קדם השני ושחט זכה וימתין הראשון עד למחר.
14
Four times a year, it is necessary for a person who sells an animal to a colleague to inform him that he already sold the mother or the daughter of the animal to another person for the sake of slaughtering it so that the latter purchaser will wait and not slaughter until the next day.33 They are: the day preceding the final holiday of Sukkot,34 the day preceding the first holiday of Pesach,35 the day preceding Shavuot,36 and the day preceding Rosh HaShanah.37
יד
בארבעה פרקים בשנה המוכר בהמה לחבירו צריך להודיעו ולומר לו כבר מכרתי אמה או בתה לאחר לשחוט כדי שימתין זה האחרון ולא ישחוט עד למחר, ואלו הן: ערב יום טוב האחרון של חג, וערב יום טוב הראשון של פסח, וערב עצרת, וערב ראש השנה.
15
When does the above apply? When he saw that the person who purchased it last was anxious to buy and it was at the end of the day, [in which instance,] it can be presumed that he will slaughter it immediately. If, however, there was ample time during the day, he is not required to inform him, for perhaps he will not slaughter until the following day.38
טו
במה דברים אמורים כשראה זה שלקח באחרונה נחפז לקנות והיה בסוף היום שחזקתו שהוא שוחט עתה, אבל אם היה ריוח ביום אינו צריך להודיעו שמא לא ישחוט אלא למחר. 44
16
When one sells the mother to a groom and the daughter to the bride, he must notify them.39 For certainly, they will slaughter them both on the same day. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
טז
והמוכר את האם לחתן והבת לכלה צריך להודיען, שודאי ביום אחד שוחטין וכל כל כיוצא בזה.
17
[With regard to the term] one day mentioned in the context of [the prohibition against slaughtering an animal] and its offspring, the day follows the night.40 what is implied? He slaughtered the first animal at the beginning of Tuesday night, he may not slaughter the other one until the beginning of Wednesday night. Similarly, if he slaughtered one at the close of Wednesday, before bein hashemashot,41 he may slaughter the other one at the beginning of Wednesday night. If he slaughtered the first during bein hashemashot Wednesday evening, he may not slaughter the second until after nightfall on Thursday.42 If he slaughtered it during the day on Thursday, he does not receive lashes.43
יז
יום אחד האמור באותו ואת בנו היום הולך אחר הלילה, כיצד הרי ששחט ראשון בתחלת ליל רביעי לא ישחוט השני עד תחלת ליל חמישי, וכן אם שחט הראשון בסוף יום רביעי קודם בין השמשות שוחט השני בתחלת ליל חמישי, שחט ראשון בין השמשות של ליל חמישי לא ישחוט השני עד ליל ששי ואם שחט ביום חמישי אינו לוקה..
FOOTNOTES
1.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 16:3) mentions a difference of opinion concerning this matter, for some authorities forbid partaking of the meat. The Rama clarifies that the difference of opinion applies only with regard to the second animal. The first animal is permitted. Moreover, even the more stringent authorities maintain that the prohibition applies:
a) only that day, and
b) only for the transgressor himself. It is a penalty imposed upon him by the Sages and not a prohibition of Scriptural Law. See Maggid Mishneh; Turei Zahav 16:23.
2.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 101) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 294) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
See Moreh Nevuchim, Vol. III, ch. 48, that states that this prohibition was given to us to prevent cruelty. For an animal will be severely aggrieved if its offspring or its mother is slaughtered before its eyes. Note, however, Hilchot Tefilah 9:7 where the Rambam emphasizes that the Torah's mitzvot were not given to us for the sake of any particular rationale. Note, however, the conclusion of Hilchot Temurah which explains that there are two dimensions to every mitzvah: that it is God's decree and that He issued that decree for a particular rationale. (See also Halachah 3 which indicates that the prohibition is a Divine decree, not limited to that rationale.)
3.
The Torah (and the Rambam) use the masculine although the prohibition applies primarily to a mother and its offspring. See Halachah 11.
4.
For the prohibition concerns slaughter.
5.
And it is forbidden to slaughter an ordinary animal in the Temple courtyard.
6.
And thus may not be sacrificed outside the Temple courtyard.
7.
I.e., either the one that was sacrificed inside the Temple or the one sacrificed outside. The point of these statements is, as stated in Halachah 6, even though the slaughter is not befitting, within the context of this prohibition, it is considered as ritual slaughter.
8.
I.e., the slaughter was unacceptable. If, however, it was discovered that the animal was trefe, it is considered to have been slaughtered and it is forbidden to slaughter the second animal (Halachah 6, Siftei Cohen 16:18).
9.
If, however, they slaughtered under the supervision of a knowledgeable adult, their slaughter is acceptable (Chapter 4, Halachah 5). Hence, this prohibition applies. See Rama (Yoreh De'ah 16:9).
10.
Hence it is equivalent to cutting off the head of the animal and the previous halachah applies.
11.
For perhaps the animal was kosher and one would be violating the prohibition.
12.
Because there is a doubt involved.
13.
Rambam LeAm questions why this concept is mentioned. It was already stated in Halachah 2.
14.
In all these instances, it is forbidden to benefit from the slaughtered animal. (See Hilchot Nizkei Mammon 11:9; Hilchot Rotzeach 10:6, Hilchot Parah Adumah 1:7; Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 7:2.)
15.
Seemingly, the same principles stated in the previous halachah would apply in this instance. Nevertheless, in this case, there is another factor involved as the Rambam continues to explain.
16.
As befits one who sacrifices to a false deity. One is not liable for both capital punishment and lashes for the same act. Since he is liable for capital punishment, he is not held liable for lashes. (See Ketubot 33b; Chullin 81b.)
17.
I.e., when the witnesses administered the warning, they mentioned the lesser transgression and not the more severe one.
18.
For in this instance, he is not liable for the more severe punishment. There is a difference of opinion among the Sages of the Talmud concerning whether one is absolved from liability for lashes in such a situation or not and the halachah follows the opinion of Rabbi Yochanan who maintains that one is liable. See Ketubot 34b-35a, Chullin, loc. cit.
19.
See the Sifra to the verse which states that the first excludes wild beasts and fowl.
20.
See the Turei Zahav 16:11 and the Siftei Cohen 16:16 who debate the rulings of the Rashba and the Maharshal who permit one to slaughter the deer and its offspring even as an initial and preferred option.
21.
I.e., a kosher domesticated animal.
22.
Since ultimately, the ancestor of the hybrid deer was a domesticated animal, we hold the slaughterer liable (see Chullin 80a). Although in his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro quotes the opinion of the Rashba who does not hold the slaughtered liable for lashes, in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 16:8), he cites the Rambam's view. The Turei Zahav 16:12 and the Siftei Cohen 16:17 debate this issue and side with the more lenient views, questioning the Rambam's ruling in light of his position in Halachah 11.
23.
And not a separate entity for whose slaughter one is held liable.
24.
If the fetus does not step on the ground, it need not be slaughtered (Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot 5:14). Hence, the prohibition against slaughtering an animal and its offspring would not apply.
25.
The Tosefta states: Since it is not required to slaughter such an animal, one is not liable for slaughtering it together with its mother.
26.
This issue was apparently a matter of uncertainty for the Rambam, for in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 5:6) he revised his interpretation several times. His final text (see Rav Kapach's version which differs from the standard published text) parallels the text here. Note, however, Bechorot 7:7 which appears to refer to this prohibition with regard to males.
27.
For he violated the prohibition twice.
28.
For he performed one forbidden act.
29.
For in this instance as well, he violated the prohibition twice.
30.
Although the same act caused two violations of the prohibition, since it was only one deed, the majority opinion in Chullin 82a only holds the person liable for set of lashes. As Rashi explains: There is one prohibition, one deed, and one warning.
31.
I.e., they both desired to slaughter their animal that day.
32.
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 16:6) states that this law applies only when the two purchased the animals from the same person. If they purchased them from different individuals, neither has precedence over the other.
33.
In other situations, it is not necessary to notify him, for it is not certain that either purchaser will slaughter the animal on that day.
34.
This is the holiday of Shemini Atzeret/Simchas Torah, a day of great rejoicing. Hence it is appropriate that meat be part of the festive meals. On the first day of Sukkot, by contrast, because the people are involved in preparing a sukkah and a lulav, they do not have the energy for excessive celebration.
35.
For the Seder is a time of great rejoicing and celebration. The seventh day of Pesach, by contrast, is not considered that important a festival.
36.
Rashi explains that the animals were necessary for sacrifices to be brought for the holiday. Tosafot states that Shavuos is customarily marked by great celebration in commemoration of the Giving of the Torah.
37.
For it is customary to begin the new year with celebratory feasts.
38.
The fact that he shows repose indicates that he may be purchasing the animal for a later date. The Ra'avad differs and maintains that the person's repose is taken into consideration only when he purchases the animal on the day before the day preceding the festival. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 16:6) quotes the Raa'vad's ruling.
39.
That the other animal was also sold. This applies even if he did not sell them both on the same day [Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 16:6)].
40.
I.e., it is a calendar day according to the Jewish calendar, not a day from sunrise to sunset or a 24-hour period beginning from the time one animal is slaughtered.
41.
This term literally means "between the suns." It refers to the time between the setting of the sun and the appearance of the stars. There is an unresolved doubt whether the day ends at sunset or at the appearance of the stars. Hence, the halachic status of this period of time is one of question.
42.
Lest the period until the appearance of the stars be considered as part of the previous day.
43.
For punishment may not be given in a situation where doubt exists.
44. אבל אם היה ריוח ביום אינו צריך להודיעו. א"א מעולם לא הפליג בריוח אותו היום אלא בערב הערב /במקור רשומה הערה זו: ס"א בערב יוה"כ/ יש מי שמקדים שני ימים ושוחט ובא רבי יהודה לומר אף על פי שיש מקדימין אינו צריך להודיעו וכן מוכח בתוספתא.
Shechitah - Chapter 13
1
When a person takes a mother together with its young and slaughters it, the meat is permitted to be eaten.1 He is, however, liable for lashes for slaughtering the mother,2 as [Deuteronomy 22:6] states: "Do not take the mother together with its offspring." Similarly, if it died before he sent it away, he is liable for lashes.3 If he sent it away after he took it, he is not liable.4
א
הלוקח אם על הבנים ושחטה, הבשר מותר באכילה ולוקה על שחיטת האם שנאמר לא תקח האם על הבנים, וכן אם מתה קודם שישלחנה לוקה, ואם שלחה אחר שלקחה פטור.
2
Similarly, [with regard to] all negative commandments that can be corrected by a positive commandment,5 one is obligated to fulfill the positive commandment. If he does not fulfill it, he is liable for lashes.6
ב
וכן כל מצות לא תעשה שניתקה לעשה חייב לקיים עשה שבה ואם לא קיימו לוקה.
3
If another person comes and seizes the mother bird from his hands and sends it away or it took flight from his possession without his knowledge, he is liable for lashes. [This is implied by ibid.:7]: "You shall certainly send away [the mother]," i.e., he must send away [the mother bird] himself. [If not,] he did not fulfill the related positive commandment.7
ג
בא אחד וחטף האם מידו ושלחה או שברחה מתחת ידו שלא מדעתו לוקה שנאמר שלח תשלח עד שישלח מעצמו והרי לא קיים עשה שבה.
4
If he took a mother bird together with its young, cut off its wings so that it cannot fly and sent it away,8 he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.9 [He must] keep [the mother bird] in his possession until her wings grow back and then send her away. If [the mother] died before this or fled and was lost, he is liable for lashes, for he did not fulfill the related positive commandment.
ד
נטל אם על הבנים וקצץ אגפיה כדי שלא תעוף ושלחה מכין אותו מכת מרדות, ומשהה אותה אצלו עד שיגדלו כנפיה ומשלחה, ואם מתה קודם לזה או ברחה ואבדה לוקה שהרי לא קיים עשה שבה.
5
How must one send away the mother? He holds her by her wings and has her fly away. If he sent her away and she returned, he sent her away and she returned10 - even if this happens - four or five times, he is obligated to send her away, as [implied by the repetition of the verb in the] phrase: "You shall certainly send away."11
ה
וכיצד משלח האם אוחז בכנפיה ומפריחה, שלחה וחזרה ושלחה וחזרה אפילו ארבע וחמש פעמים חייב לשלח שנאמר שלח תשלח.
6
Although a person says "I will take the mother bird and send away the young,"12 he is obligated to send away the mother bird, as the verse states: "You shall certainly send away the mother."
ו
האומר הריני נוטל את האם ומשלח את הבנים חייב לשלח את האם שנאמר שלח תשלח את האם.
7
If he [sent away the mother,]13 took the offspring and [then] returned them to the nest and the mother came back to them, he is not obligated to send [her] away.14
It is permitted to send away the mother and then snare her again. The Torah forbade snaring only when she cannot fly away because of her offspring over which she is hovering so that they not be taken,15 as [ibid.:6] states: "And the mother is resting on the chicks." If, however, he removed her from his grasp and then snared her again, it is permitted.
ז
לקח את הבנים והחזירן לקן ואח"כ חזרה האם עליהן פטור מלשלח, שלח את האם וחזר וצד אותה הרי זה מותר, לא אסרה תורה אלא לצוד אותה והיא אינה יכולה לפרוח בשביל הבנים שהיא מרחפת עליהן שלא ילקחו שנאמר והאם רובצת על האפרוחים, אבל אם הוציאה מתחת ידו וחזר וצד אותה מותר.
8
[The mitzvah to] send away the mother bird applies only with regard to a kosher species of fowl16 that are not at hand, e.g., doves that rested in a dovecote or on a loft,17 wild fowl that nested in an orchard. [This is derived from the phrase (ibid.)]: "When you will chance upon." When, however, [fowl is] at hand, e.g., ducks, chicken, and doves that nested in a building, one is not liable to send away the mother.
ח
שלוח האם אינו נוהג אלא בעוף טהור שאינו מזומן כגון יוני שובך ועלייה ועופות שקננו בפרדס שנאמר כי יקרא, אבל המזומן כגון אווזין ותרנגולין ויונים שקננו בבית אינו חייב לשלח.
9
If the chicks could fly and thus they no longer needed their mother or [the mother was sitting on] unfertilized eggs,18 he is not obligated to send away [the mother]. If the chicks were trefot, it is comparable to unfertilized eggs and he is not liable to send away [the mother].19
ט
היו האפרוחין מפריחין שאינן צריכין לאמן או ביצים מוזרות אינו חייב לשלח, היו אפרוחין טרפות הרי אלו כביצים מוזרות ופטור מלשלח.
10
When a male fowl is resting on a nest, one is not obligated to send him away [before taking the young].20 When a non-kosher bird is resting on the nest of the eggs of a kosher fowl or a kosher fowl is resting on the eggs of a non-kosher fowl, one is not obligated to send away [the fowl that is resting].21
י
זכר שמצאו רובץ על הקן פטור מלשלח, עוף טמא רובץ על ביצי עוף טהור, או עוף טהור רובץ על ביצי עוף טמא פטור מלשלח.
11
When a [kosher fowl] was resting on kosher eggs of a different species, one should send [the bird] away. If, however, one fails to do so, one is not liable.22If the mother is trefe, he is obligated to send her away.23
יא
היתה רובצת על ביצים שאינן מינה והן טהורין הרי זה משלח, ואם לא שלח אינו לוקה, היתה האם טרפה חייב לשלחה.
12
When one slits a portion of the gullet24 [of the mother]25 before he took her, he is liable to send her away. If he did not send her away, he is not liable for lashes.26
יב
שחט מקצת סימנין בתוך הקן קודם שיקחנה חייב לשלח ואם לא שלח אינו לוקה.
13
[The following laws apply if the mother bird] was hovering [over the nest]: If her wings were touching the nest, one is obligated to send her away.27 If not, he is not obligated. If there was a cloth or feathers intervening between her wings and the nest, he must send her away. If he did not send her away, he is not liable for lashes.28
יג
היתה מעופפת, אם כנפיה נוגעות בקן חייב לשלח, ואם לאו פטור מלשלח, היתה מטלית או כנפים חוצצות בין כנפיה ובין הקן הרי זה משלח, ואם לא שלח אינו לוקה.
14
If there were two rows of eggs and [the mother bird's] wings were touching [only] the top row, [the mother bird] was sitting on unfertilized eggs, but there were good eggs below them, one female was sitting on another female, a male was sitting on the nest and the female was sitting on the male - [in all these situations,] one should not take [the mother bird with the offspring]. If he takes [her], he should send her away. But if he does not send her away, he is not liable for lashes.29
יד
היו שני סדרי ביצים וכנפיה נוגעות בסדר העליון או שהיתה רובצת על ביצים מוזרות ותחתיהן ביצים יפות או שהיתה אם על גבי אם, או שהיה הזכר על הקן והאם על הזכר הרי זה לא יקח ואם לקח ישלח ואם לא שלח אינו לוקה.
15
If [the mother bird] was sitting among the young or the eggs and was not touching them,30 one is not liable to send her away.31 Similarly, if she was at the side of the nest and her wings were touching the nest from the side, he is not obligated to send her away.
טו
היתה יושבת בין האפרוחים או בין הביצים ואינה נוגעת בהן פטור מלשלח, וכן אם היתה בצד הקן וכנפיה נוגעות בקן מצדו פטור מלשלח.
16
When [the mother bird was perched] on two branches of a tree and the nest was positioned between them, we make an evaluation. In all instances where the mother would fall on the nest if the branches were removed, one is obligated to send her away.32
טז
היתה על שני בדי אילן והקן ביניהן רואין כל שאילו ינטלו הבדין תפול על הקן חייב לשלח.
17
When the mother is resting on one chick or on one egg, one is obligated to send her away.33 When a person finds a nest floating on the water or positioned on the back of an animal, he is obligated to send the mother away. [The verse] mentions "chicks or eggs"34 and "on any tree or on the ground" [not as exclusions], but because the Torah speaks about the commonplace situations.35
יז
היתה רובצת על אפרוח אחד או על ביצה אחת חייב לשלח, המוצא קן על פני המים או על גבי בעלי חיים חייב לשלח, לא נאמר אפרוחים או ביצים ולא נאמר בכל עץ או על הארץ אלא שדיבר הכתוב בהווה.
18
It is forbidden to acquire the eggs as long as the mother is resting upon them. Therefore even if a mother bird was resting on eggs or chicks in one's loft or dovecote, they are not considered as "at hand" and his courtyard does not acquire them for him.36 Just as he cannot acquire them on behalf of others [until he sends away the mother], so, too, his courtyard cannot acquire them on his behalf.37 Therefore, he must send [her] away.38
יח
אסור לזכות בביצים כל זמן שהאם רובצת עליהן, לפיכך אפילו היתה רובצת על הביצים או על האפרוחים בעלייתו ושובכו אינן מזומנין, ולא קנה לו חצרו כשם שאינו יכול לזכות בהן לאחרים כך לא תזכה לו חצרו בהן ולפיכך חייב לשלח.
19
It is forbidden to take a mother bird together with her offspring, even to purify a person with tzara'at.39 If he took [the mother], he is obligated to send her away. If he did not, he is liable for lashes.40 [The rationale is that] a positive commandment41 does not supersede the observance of a negative commandment [that is reinforced] by a positive commandment.42 And a positive commandment does not supersede another positive commandment.43
יט
אסור ליטול אם על הבנים ואפילו לטהר בהן את המצורע שהיא מצוה, ואם לקח חייב לשלח, ואם לא שלח לוקה, שאין עשה דוחה לא תעשה ועשה, (ועשה) ולא עשה דוחה עשה.
20
[The following rule applies when] a person consecrates a wild fowl to the Temple treasury, it flies away from his hand, but he recognizes it and finds it resting on chicks or on eggs. He should take the entire [nest]44 and bring it to the Temple treasurer. [The rationale is that the mitzvah of] sending away the mother bird does not apply with regard to consecrated [fowl], as [implied by Deuteronomy 22:7]: "And you may take the offspring for yourself." These may not [be taken] for yourself.45
כ
המקדיש עוף לבדק הבית ופרח מידו והרי הוא מכירו ומצאו רובץ על האפרוחים או על הביצים לוקח הכל ומביאן לידי גזבר, שאין שילוח האם נוהג במוקדשין שנאמר ואת הבנים תקח לך ואלו אינן שלך.
21
When a fowl killed a human being, one is not obligated to send it away. [The rationale is that] one is commanded to bring it to court so that it will be judged.46
כא
עוף שהרג את הנפש פטור מלשלח מפני שהוא מצווה להביאו לבית דין לדון אותו..
FOOTNOTES
1.
The fact that he violated a transgression in taking the mother does not cause the meat to be prohibited.
2.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 306) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 544) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
The person transgresses the prohibition when he takes the mother and the offspring. Nevertheless, as long as the mother is alive and he can correct his deed by sending her away, he is not liable for lashes. This follows the principle of lav hanitak li'asai, a prohibition that can be corrected by a positive commandment, as stated in the following halachah.
3.
For he can no longer fulfill the positive commandment.
4.
For he corrected his actions through the positive commandment. Nevertheless, at the outset, it is forbidden for him to take the mother. He must send it away first, as is the simple meaning of the Torah's commandment. See Siftei Cohen 292:11.
5.
The positive commandment to send away the mother bird is also considered as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah [Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 148); Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 545)].
See the Kessef Mishneh (to Halachah 19) which explains that Chullin 141a mentions a difference of opinion concerning this mitzvah between Rabbi Yehudah and the Sages. Rabbi Yehudah maintains - and this is the simple meaning of the verse - that the positive commandment requires one to send away the mother bird only before taking it. Thus according to his view, sending away the mother after it was taken does not fulfill a mitzvah and hence, does not correct the transgression. The Sages differ and maintain that the halachic definition of the mitzvah also includes sending away the bird after it was taken. Therefore, if one took the mother together with its young, he can correct his transgression by sending away the mother. The Rambam's decision reflects the Sages' position.
6.
See Makkot 16b which mentions a difference of opinion concerning the matter. One view maintains that as long as the person does not prevent himself from correcting the transgression through his own conduct, e.g., with regard to the matter at hand, he did not kill the mother bird, he is not lible for lashes. The other view, which as above is accepted as halachah by the Rambam, is that the person becomes liable for lashes when he violates the transgression. It is just that the punishment is suspended as long as he has the opportunity to correct the matter. Once, however, that opportunity no longer exists, even if it is not his fault - e.g., in the matter at hand, the bird dies - that punishment is meted out.
7.
And is therefore held liable for the violation of the negative commandment.
8.
I.e., he is trying to perform the mitzvah by sending the mother bird away on its feet so that he will not be held liable and yet will be able to take it again shortly afterwards. See Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 292:4).
9.
I.e., he is punished for his defiance of the spirit of the Torah's commandments even though it is possible that he will not actually be held liable for lashes.
10.
I.e., as long as the mother returns before he takes the young so that the mitzvah is still relevant (Siftei Cohen 292:8).
11.
See Bava Metzia 31a which gives several examples of how the repetition of a verb in the Torah implies that a commandment must be fulfilled even 100 times.
12.
And thus seemingly, he will be fulfilling the intent of the Torah's commandment, for he will not be taking the mother and the young together.
13.
This addition is made on the basis of Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 292:5).
14.
Once he has taken the offspring, they are considered as "at hand," and this mitzvah no longer applies as stated in the following halachah and notes (Siftei Cohen 292:10).
15.
For, as emphasized in Moreh Nevuchim, Vol. III, ch. 48, which explains that this is the motivating rationale for this mitzvah: to prevent the cruel act of taking the young in front of the mother. Note, however, Hilchot Tefilah 9:7 and the resolution of the apparent contradiction in the previous chapter.
16.
Chullin 139b derives this concept from the exegesis of the prooftext from Deuteronomy.
17.
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 292:2 and commentaries) emphasizes that if the nest is within the person's property and the mother bird lifts itself up, the person automatically acquires the offspring. From that time on, they are considered as "at hand" and the mitzvah does not apply. See Halachah 18 and notes.
18.
Our translation is based on Rashi's commentary to Chullin 64b.
19.
Chullin, loc. cit., notes that the verse mentions both eggs and chicks and derives both of these concepts from an equation it establishes between the two: Just as the chicks are entities that will continue to exist, so too, the eggs must be entities that will continue to exist [in contrast to unfertilized eggs that will spoil after a certain time]. Just as the eggs require their mother, so too, the chicks must require their mother.
20.
Chullin 140a emphasizes that the verse mentions a mother, implying "and not a father."
21.
For Chullin 138b states that the verse forbids taking the bird and its offspring "for yourself." Implied is that there is no prohibition when taking it for your dogs, i.e., taking a non-kosher species which is fit only to be fed to the dogs.
22.
There is an unresolved question concerning this issue in Chullin 140b. Hence, it is forbidden to take the birds, but one is not liable for lashes because of the doubt.
23.
Even though it is forbidden to eat the mother, there is a difference between it and a fowl from a non-kosher species. A mother from a non-kosher species is excluded because the prooftext uses the term tzipor which indicates a kosher species. A bird which is trefe, though forbidden, is still a tzipor (Siftei Cohen 292:1).
24.
The literal meaning of the Rambam's words is "If he cut a portion of the signs." We have translated the Rambam's words as above because as obvious from the conclusion of his ruling, there is a doubt whether he is obligated to send away the mother bird. And with regard to the windpipe there is no doubt that he is obligated to send away the mother.
To explain: Chullin 140b questions: "Do we say that since after slitting a portion of the signs the animal will be trefe, is there a need to send it away?" Now, if a person slits less than half the windpipe, the fowl is not trefe and if he slits more than half of it, its slaughter is completed. Hence, we are forced to say that he is speaking about cutting a portion - but less than half - of the gullet. If he does not complete the slaughter, making such a slit will render the fowl trefe.
25.
The fact the Rambam uses the term sheyikachenah, "before he takes her," implies that he is speaking about the mother bird. This understanding is also acknowledged by the Tur and Rabbenu Nissim. In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro questions that interpretation, noting that even if the mother bird was made trefe by slitting its gullet, it would have to be sent away as stated in the previous halachah. Therefore, he suggests amending the text of the Mishneh Torah to imply that the signs of the chicks were slit and the question is, since he is involved in the slaughter of the chicks and stopping to send away the mother would render them trefe, must he stop and send her away or not. He follows this interpretation in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 292:10).
26.
Since the Talmud does not resolve the question it raises, one cannot be held liable for lashes because of the doubt.
27.
The Torah uses the expression "resting on the nest." Chullin 40b infers that if the mother is hovering over the nest, the mitzvah does not imply. Since the verse does not use the term "sitting," however, we learn that the obligation exists even when the mother is not sitting in the nest but lingering close by in a manner that its wings are touching.
28.
This question is left unresolved by Chullin, loc. cit. Hence, the Rambam rules that one must be stringent and send away the mother, but because of the doubt, cannot be held liable for lashes if he did not.
29.
All of these situations are questions left unresolved by Chullin 140b. Hence, as above, one must be stringent and send away the mother, but because of the doubt, cannot be held liable for lashes if he did not.
30.
In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro mentions a question raised by Rabbenu Nissim: Since touching the nest from the side is not sufficient as indicated by the concluding clause in the halachah, what does it matter if the mother bird touches its young from the side when it sits among them? Based on that objection, in his Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 292:12), he incorporates Rabbenu Nissim's understanding when quoting this law.
31.
For the Torah speaks about the mother "resting on the eggs or the chicks" and not sitting at their side.
32.
Rashi, Chullin 140b, states that this applies even if the mother's wings are not touching the nest. As long as she is resting directly above the nest, it is considered as if she was resting on it. The Siftei Cohen 292:17 quotes this point as halachah.
33.
As evident from Chullin 12:3, the Biblical command speaks about "a nest." As long as a nest contains one egg or chick, it is still considered a nest.
34.
Using a plural form.
35.
This is a general principle applying with regard to many Biblical commandments. See Yevamot 15:2, Shabbat 65a, Nedarim 48a.
36.
The Rambam is referring to a principle in Jewish business law which maintains that a person can acquire property by virtue of its presence in his domain. As the Rambam states in Hilchot Gezelah Va'Avedah 17:8-11:
A person's courtyard can acquire property for him without him being aware of it. Thus, if a lost object falls into a person's courtyard, he acquires it.
When does the above apply? When the courtyard is protected. [When, by contrast, a lost article enters a person's] field or garden [different rules apply]. If he is standing at the side of his field and says, "May my field acquire it for me," he acquires it. If, however, he is not standing there, or he is standing there but does not make such a statement [he does not acquire it.]...
The [potential for] a man [to acquire property by virtue of its presence in his] courtyard is derived, by contrast, from [the fact that] he is able to acquire an article via an agent. Just as an agent can acquire [an article] for him, so too, can he acquire [an article by virtue of its presence in his] courtyard....
[The following rules apply when a person] sees... young doves that cannot fly [in his property]: [When the following conditions are met:] he was standing at the side of his field, [the animals] were on his property, and he could catch them if he ran, he can acquire them [by virtue of their presence in] his field if he states: "May my field acquire them for me."
Thus in the case at hand, since the person cannot acquire the eggs himself until he sends away the mother, his courtyard cannot acquire them on his behalf (Chullin 141b).
37.
For as stated in the quoted portion, the potential for a person's property to acquire an article on his behalf is derived from the laws of agency.
38.
As mentioned above, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 292:2) states that if the mother bird lifted itself up, the person can acquire the chicks by virtue of their presence in his property even if he does not remove them from their nest. From that time on, they are considered as "at hand" and this mitzvah does not apply. Indeed, he can tap the nest so that the mother will rise up and then acquire the young (Kessef Mishneh).
39.
A skin condition, resembling leprosy, that is visited upon a person as retribution for speaking gossip and slander. The purification process for such a person is described in Leviticus, ch. 14, and Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at 11:1.
40.
As stated in Halachah 2. Even if he used the mother bird for a mitzvah, he still receives lashes for violating the transgression.
41.
The purification of the person with tzara'at.
42.
The prohibition of taking the mother which is reinforced by the mitzvah to send her away. Note the Kessef Mishneh who questions whether the two mitzvot should be placed in this category, for according to the Sages (whose opinion is accepted as halachah), the two mitzvot do not apply at the same time.
43.
I.e., once he has taken the mother bird, he is obligated to send her away and the observance of another positive commandment, e.g., the purification rite mentioned above, does not supplant it.
44.
For not only the mother, but also the offspring, belong to the Temple treasury. For the mother gave birth to them after she had been consecrated.
45.
For as above the offspring are also the property of the Temple treasury.
Significantly, although the Rambam's ruling is based on Chullin 138b, he does not quote the wording of the Talmud, but instead, explains the derivation of the ruling in a different manner. The Lechem Mishneh explains that this reflects a pattern found frequently in the Mishneh Torah: The Rambam will explain the derivation of a law differently than the Talmud if it appears to him that his derivation is simpler and more direct.
46.
See Hilchot Sanhedrin 5:2 which states that an animal that kills a human must be judged by a court of 23 judges.
Shechitah - Chapter 14
1
It is a positive commandment1 to cover the blood of a kosher wild beast or fowl2 that was slaughtered, as [Leviticus 17:13] states: "If you will snare a wild beast or a fowl that may be eaten, you shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth." Therefore, before covering it, he is obligated to recite the blessing: Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the earth who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to cover the blood.
א
מצות עשה לכסות דם שחיטת חיה טהורה או עוף טהור שנאמר אשר יצוד ציד חיה או עוף אשר יאכל ושפך את דמו וכסהו בעפר, לפיכך חייב לברך קודם שיכסה בא"י אמ"ה אקב"ו על כיסוי הדם.
2
[The mitzvah] to cover the blood applies to animals that are at hand and those that are not at hand. [The verse mentions:] "If you will snare" only because it speaks about the commonplace situation. It applies with regard to ordinary animals, but not to those consecrated: whether they were consecrated [to be offered on] the altar or consecrated to the Temple treasury. If a person transgresses3 and slaughters [such an animal], he is not obligated to cover its blood.
ב
כסוי הדם נוהג במזומן ובשאינו מזומן, לא נאמר אשר יצוד אלא בהווה, ונוהג בחולין ולא במוקדשין, בין קדשי המזבח בין קדשי בדק הבית ואם עבר ושחטן אינו חייב לכסות את דמן.
3
If a person slaughters a wild beast or a fowl and afterwards, consecrates them - or consecrates the blood - he is obligated to cover the blood.4
ג
שחט חיה ועוף ואחר כך הקדישן או הקדיש את הדם חייב לכסות.
4
It is necessary to cover the blood of a hybrid that comes from the mating of an animal and a wild beast or an animal that we do not know whether to classify as a domesticated animal or a wild beast,5 but one does not recite the blessing.6 When a person slaughters for the sake of a sick person on the Sabbath, he is obligated to cover the blood after the Sabbath.7 Similarly, when a person slaughters an animal whose status is doubtful or is a hybrid on a festival, he should cover its blood after the festival.8
ד
כלאים הבא מבהמה וחיה וכן בריה שהיא ספק בהמה או חיה צריך לכסות ואינו מברך, השוחט לחולה בשבת חייב לכסות לאחר שבת וכן השוחט ספק או כלאים ביום טוב מכסה דמו לאחר יום טוב.
5
When a person slaughters many fowl and several types of wild beasts in one place, he should recite one blessing and cover the blood of all of them together at one time.9
ה
השוחט עופות ומיני חיה במקום אחד מברך ברכה אחת לכולן וכסוי אחד לכולן.
6
When blood becomes mixed with water, one is obligated to cover it if it has the appearance of blood. If not, one is not liable. If it became mixed with wine or the blood of a domesticated animal, one considers it as if they were water. If were [the wine or blood] to have been water, [the mixture] would have appeared to be blood, he is obligated to cover the entire mixture. If not, he is not obligated.
ו
דם שנתערב במים אם יש בו מראה דם חייב לכסות ואם לאו פטור, נתערב ביין או בדם בהמה רואין אותן כאילו הם מים, אם אפשר שיראה מראה הדם שחייב לכסותו כשיעור זה אילו היה מים חייב לכסות הכל ואם לאו פטור.
7
If a person covered blood and then it became revealed, he is not obligated to cover it a second time.10 If blood was covered by [dust blown] by the wind, one is not obligated to cover it.11 If it became revealed again after the wind covered it, he is obligated to cover it.12
ז
כסהו ונתגלה אינו חייב לכסותו פעם אחרת, כסתהו הרוח אינו חייב לכסות, חזר ונתגלה אחר שכסתהו הרוח חייב לכסות.
8
If there is no other blood [from the slaughter] except the blood which spurted out [while the animal was being slaughtered] and the blood on the knife,13 one is obligated to cover it.14
ח
דם הניתז ושעל הסכין אם אין שם דם אלא הוא חייב לכסות. 34
9
[The following rules apply if] one slaughters and the blood is absorbed in the ground. If a mark remains, he is obligated to cover it. If not, it is as if it was covered by the wind15 and he is not obligated to cover it.
ט
שחט ונבלע הדם בקרקע אם רישומו ניכר חייב לכסות, ואם לאו הרי זה כמי שכסתהו הרוח ופטור מלכסות.
10
The only blood that must be covered is the blood of slaughter [that produces meat] that is fit to be eaten, as [the prooftext cited] states: "that may be eaten."16 Therefore, if a person slaughters and the animal is discovered to be trefe, one slaughters ordinary [fowl or beasts] in the Temple Courtyard,17 one slaughters fowl or beasts that were condemned to be stoned to death,18 one slaughters an animal and causes it to become a nevelah, one is not obligated to cover the blood. Similarly when a deaf-mute, a mentally or emotional incompetent person or a minor slaughters in private, there is no obligation19 to cover the blood [of the animal] they slaughtered.20
י
אין חייב בכסוי אלא דם שחיטה הראויה לאכילה שנאמר אשר יאכל, לפיכך השוחט ונמצאת טרפה, או השוחט חולין בעזרה, או השוחט חיה ועוף שנגמר דינן לסקילה והשוחט ונתנבלה בידו פטור מלכסות, וכן חרש שוטה וקטן ששחטו בינן לבין עצמן פטורין מלכסות דם שחיטתן.
11
With what should [the blood] be covered? With earth,21 lime, gypsum, fine fertilizer, fine sand that need not be crushed by a potter, crushed rocks and earthen-ware, fine flax chips, fine saw dust, bricks, burnt mud,22 and sealing clay that are crushed, for all of these are types of "earth." If, however, one covered it with a utensil or with stones, it is not considered as "covered," for the verse states "with earth."
יא
במה מכסין בסיד ובגפסית בזבל דק ובחול דק שאין היוצר צריך לכותשו ובשחיקת אבנים וחרשים ובנעורת של פשתן דקה ובנסורת חרשים דקה ובלבינה וחרסית ומגופה שכתשה שכל אלו מין עפר הן, אבל אם כפה עליו כלי או כסהו באבנים אין זה כיסוי שנאמר בעפר.
12
For this reason, we do not cover [blood] with coarse fertilizer, coarse sand, flour, bran, grain fiber, or filings from metal utensils, for these are not types of "earth." There is one exception: filings of gold alone may be used to cover [blood], for they are called "dust,"23 as [Job 28:6] states: "And it possesses the dust of gold" and [Deuteronomy 9:21] speaks [of grinding the Gold Calf] "until it was thin, into dust."
יב
לפיכך אין מכסים בזבל גס וחול גס וקמח וסובין ומורסן ושחיקת כלי מתכות לפי שאין אלו מין עפר, חוץ משחיקת הזהב בלבד שמכסין בהם מפני שנקרא עפר שנאמר ועפרות זהב לו ואומר עד אשר דק לעפר.
13
We may cover [blood] with oven soot, stibium,24 powder from mills, and ashes. [This includes] ashes from trees and ashes from clothes, even ashes from meat that was burnt, for [Numbers 19:17] speaks of "the ashes of the burnt sin-offering."25 It is permitted to cover [blood] with the ashes of a city that went astray [and was therefore destroyed].26
יג
מכסין בשיחור והוא פיח הכבשן ובכוחל ובנקרת פסילים ובאפר בין אפר עצים בין אפר בגדים אפילו אפר בשר שנשרף שהרי כתוב מעפר שריפת החטאת, ומותר לכסות בעפר עיר הנדחת.
14
One who slaughters must place earth below27 and then slaughter, [pouring the blood] into [the earth]. Afterwards, he covers it with earth. He should not slaughter [and pour the blood] into a container28 and then cover it with earth.
יד
השוחט צריך ליתן עפר למטה ואחר כך ישחוט בו ואחר כך יכסה בעפר אבל לא ישחוט בכלי ויכסה בעפר.
15
The person who slaughters [the animal] should cover its blood,29 as [the above prooftext ] states: "[You shall pour out its blood and] cover it with earth."30 If he did not cover the blood and another person sees it, he is obligated to cover it, for this is an independent mitzvah and is not dependent on the slaughterer alone.31
טו
ומי ששחט הוא יכסה שנאמר וכסהו בעפר, ואם לא כסהו וראהו אחר חייב לכסות שזו מצוה בפני עצמה ואינה תלויה בשוחט לבד.
16
When a person covers the blood, he should not cover it with his feet,32 but instead with his hands, a knife, or a utensil, so that he will not treat it with disdain and regard the mitzvoth with scorn. For the mitzvot in and of themselves are not worthy of honor. Instead, [the honor is] due He, blessed be He, who commanded us to observe them and [thus] saved us from groping in darkness and thus granted us a lamp to straighten crooked paths and a light to illumine the upright ways.33 And so [Psalms 119:105] states: "Your words are a lamp to my feet and a light for my ways."
Blessed be G‑d who grants assistance.
טז
וכשמכסה לא יכסה ברגלו אלא בידו או בסכין או בכלי כדי שלא ינהוג בו מנהג בזיון ויהיו מצות בזויות עליו, שאין הכבוד לעצמן של מצות אלא למי שצוה בהן ברוך הוא והצילנו מלמשש בחשך וערך אותנו נר ליישר המעקשים ואור להורות נתיבות היושר, וכן הוא אומר נר לרגלי דבריך ואור לנתיבתי. נגמר ספר חמישי והוא ספר קדושה ומנין פרקיו שלשה וחמשים: הלכות איסורי ביאה שנים ועשרים פרקים, הלכות מאכלות אסורות שבעה עשר פרקים, הלכות שחיטה ארבעה עשר פרקים. ובכאן נשלם החלק השני, ה' במעגלי צדק ינחני..
FOOTNOTES
1.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 147) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 187) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
2.
Both a wild fowl and a domesticated one. One need not, by contrast, cover the blood of a domesticated animal that was slaughtered.
3.
For it is forbidden to slaughter animals consecrated to the Temple treasury until they have been redeemed.
4.
Because when the blood was poured out, it did not have a connection to the Temple treasury, and at that time, the person became obligated to cover it.
5.
The commentaries to Chullin 83a employ this interpretation with regard to a kevi, an animal which one opinion in Chullin 80a understands as referring to an animal whose species could not be identified as a domesticated animal or a wild beast. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 28:4) employs this concept with regard to a buffalo.
6.
We are unsure of the status of this animal and do not know whether there is an obligation to cover its blood or not. Hence, we cover it, but do not recite a blessing, lest the blessing be recited in vain.
7.
For covering it on the Sabbath would be a violation of the prohibition against performing labor.
8.
He is required to cover the animal's blood because of the doubt as stated in the first clause. Nevertheless, he may not cover it on the festival, for perhaps he is not obligated to do so, and hence, will be performing a forbidden labor on the festival for no valid reason. For this reason, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 28:3) rules that, as an initial and preferred option, one should not slaughter such an animal on a festival. See also Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 498:18) which states that even if one has earth prepared before the festival so that covering the blood will not involve the transgression of a prohibition, one should not cover it on a festival because of the impression that will be created. People might think that it was definitely determined that it is a wild beast and may therefore partake of its fat [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Chullin 6:1) based on Beitzah 8b].
See also the Siftei Cohen 28:10 which states that the blood must be poured out on the ground on the festival. It cannot be saved in a utensil (because of the prohibition mentioned in Chapter 2, Halachah 5) and spilled out after the festival.
9.
I.e., it is not necessary to cover the blood immediately. Instead, one may wait until he has slaughtered all the animals he desires and then cover the blood.
10.
For he has already fulfilled the mitzvah involved.
11.
For the Torah's commandment obligates one to cover only blood that is apparent. If it is covered, there is no mitzvah involved.
12.
Since the person never covered the blood himself, it is as if it was never covered. See Pitchei Teshuvah 28:4; Magen Avraham 586:6 which discuss whether there is a definite obligation to cover the blood in such a situation or there is an unresolved question and one does so because of the doubt involved. The question of whether or not to recite a blessing in this situation depends on the clarification of this issue.
13.
Usually, a certain quantity of blood is poured out directly after the slaughter as well.
14.
According to the Rambam's interpretation of the mishnah (Chullin 6:6), if there is other blood aside from this, it is sufficient to cover that other blood. It is not necessary to cover all the blood. The Ra'avad differs and maintains that all the blood must be covered. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 28:15 follows the Rambam's view.
15.
See Halachah 7.
16.
This prooftext causes the ruling to be different from that applying to the prohibition against slaughtering an animal and its offspring on the same day. See Chullin 85a.
17.
Which are forbidden to be eaten (Chapter 2, Halachah 2).
18.
I.e., an animal or fowl that killed a human.
19.
We have used a non-literal translation, for these individuals are not obligated in the performance of any mitzvot. See Siftei Cohen 28:24 which states that we are forbidden to cover this blood.
20.
As stated in Chapter 4, Halachah 5, if these individuals slaughter privately, the slaughter is unacceptable. If, however, they slaughter in the presence of an expert and he states that they slaughtered correctly, the slaughter is acceptable and the blood must be covered.
21.
Though this term is not found in the standard printed texts. It is found in authoritative manuscripts and early printings. The version of the standard printed text can be interpreted to mean that in this halachah, the Rambam is clarifying which other substances can be considered as "earth."
When quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 28:23) gives the following introduction: "Any substance in which seeds will grow is called סearth'.... If [seeds] will not grow in it, but it is called סearth,' we may cover [blood] with it."
22.
This translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Ma'aser Sheni 5:1). In his commentary to 3:7, 10:2, he interprets the term as "crushed earthenware." We, however, used the former translation to avoid redundancy. Others cite the interpretation of the Aruch who explains that the term refers to a type of lime.
23.
The Hebrew term afar has both the meaning "earth" and "dust."
24.
A blue-powder uses for makeup and medicinal purposes in Talmudic times.
25.
I.e., the red heifer.
26.
See Deuteronomy ch. 13 and Hilchot Avodat Kochavim, ch. , which explain that if an entire city is led astray and worships false deities, the city is condemned, the transgressors executed, and the city burnt. With the ruling in this halachah, the Rambam is explaining that although it is forbidden to benefit from the property - and even the ashes - of such a condemned city, its ashes may be used for this purpose. The rationale is that using the ashes for the mitzvah is not considered as benefiting from them, because the mitzvoth were not given for our benefit (Chullin 89a).
27.
Moreover, this earth must be loose. One should not slaughter over a place where the earth is hard [Kessef Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 28:5)].
28.
Even if the utensil contains murky water and thus the prohibition mentioned in Chapter 2, Halachah 5, does not apply.
29.
One may, however, give another person the privilege of fulfilling the mitzvah. For that reason, there are many who ask the ritual slaughterer for the privilege of fulfilling the mitzvah of covering the blood after fulfilling the custom of kapporot. Nevertheless, one must ask the slaughterer for the privilege, one who takes it without asking is liable to pay the slaughterer a fine for "stealing" his mitzvah. See Turei Zahav 28:8.
30.
Chullin 87a states: "The one who סpours out its blood' should סcover it.'"
31.
Chullin, loc. cit., notes that the passage states: "And you shall say to the children of Israel," implying that the mitzvah is the concern of the entire people.
32.
I.e., by kicking the earth over the blood.
33.
As Bereishis Rabbah 44:1 states: "The mitzvoth were given to the Jewish people solely to refine the created beings with them." See also Moreh Nevuchim, Vol. III, ch. 26.
34. דם הניתז ושעל גבי הסכין וכו'. א"א אלו דברי הרב ז"ל שעושה דברי רבי יהודה מפרש משום דאמר אימתי אבל אין אחרים מודים לו משום דגמרא מפרש להו דפליגי בקראי.
Hayom Yom:
• English Text | Video Class
Monday, Tevet 21, 5778 · 08 January 2018
"Today's Day"
Tuesday, Tevet 21, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Sh'mot, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 104-105.
Tanya: Yet, because the (p. 47)...as explained earlier. (p. 49).
The Rebbe, R. Yosef Yitzchak, once met a watercarrier carrying full buckets and remarked: When one encounters water there is an appropriate maxim of the Baal Shem Tov that he should say, namely: "When encountering water one should say that the Baal Shem says that it is a sign of blessing."
Daily Thought:
Sneaky Blessings
Due to the limitations of your reality, some of your best friends can enter only incognito.
In fact, the really big ones sometimes sneak in disguised as ugly monsters and vicious enemies. Otherwise, the guards at the gate would never permit them entry.
These are the events optimists call “blessings in disguise.”
Here’s how to fire the guards: Expand your mind, expand your world and sincerely rejoice in whatever G‑d sends you. Then the blessings will be free to enter in all their glory.
---
No comments:
Post a Comment