Talmidav Shel Aharon
10-5768: Mitzvah N-2
December 23, 2007
Negative Mitzvah 2 – It is a negative commandment that Hametz (leavened food) is not to be seen in the domain or possession of a member of the Jewish People, the entire seven days of Pesach.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “and no leavened bread shall be seen with you.” (Ex. 13:7) It is in force everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
Negative Mitzvah 3 – It is a negative commandment that Hametz is not to be found in a Jew’s domain or possession on Passover.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “Seven days leaven shall not be found in yoru houses (Ex. 12:19) If someone leaves Hametz in his home on Passover - for example, if he lets dough become leavened on Passover and leaves it in his home, or he buys Hametz and puts it away willfully, he is liable for lashes for two sins. (the prohibition of being seen and for being found) because he has done a physical act to violate them. But if he let Hametz remain on Passover from before Passover, not having destroyed it, while he violates the two prohibitions noted above, he would not be liable for lashes, since he did no physical act. If the Hametz of a non-Jew is found on the premises of a Jew, if the Jew has accepted responsibility for it he is obligated to destroy it. If he did not accept responsibility for it, there is no prohibition against keeping it since Scripture says, “no leavened bread shall be seen for you”. (Ex. 13:7) Yours you may not see, but you may see that of others. If, however, the non-Jew can sue the Jew for it according to a non-Jewish law, then even if he did not accept responsibility for it, he is duty bound to destroy it.
If Hametz has thus remained through Passover, it is forbidden to have any benefit from it, by the law of the Sages, as a penalty because the two prohibitions against it being seen and being found in a Jew’s domain, have been violated. Even if it was forgotten inadvertently, the Sages declared it forbidden. It is in force everywhere, in every time, for both men and women.
When the Torah says that all leavened products have to go, they really mean it. You have to remove it from your possession and remove it from your homes and business. You can’t see it, touch it or use it in any way. It is totally forbidden for a Jew to have any connection to Hametz on Passover.
This law applies as long as the Hametz does not belong to the Jew. We are permitted to see, and possess Hametz that does not belong to us. (Remembering that to eat such Hametz on Passover or any other day would constitute stealing from the non-Jew). It is this exception that permits us to “sell” Hametz on Passover to a non-Jew so that we do not need to remove it all from our homes. This sale on Passover is not a “legal fiction” it is a binding sale that allows the non-Jew to buy all the Hametz in our homes for a very small down payment with the balance due to the seller as soon as Passover is finished. Since the final payment is quite large, usually the non-Jew does not pay the final installment on time and forfeits the sale.
Punishment for seeing and owning Hametz depends on there being a willful act to bring the Hametz home. If it was left for Pesach by accident or if it is not his fault it has come into his home, than he still must remove it and destroy it and he cannot derive any benefit from it. He cannot sell it to a non-Jew or get a charitable tax deduction for giving it to charity. All of this is due to the declaration that is made before Passover begins that “all Hametz in my possession is declared to be ownerless and like the dust of the earth.” This applies to any large amounts of Hametz that the Jew is unaware of being in his possession, and to any small amounts of Hametz that may be a minor ingredient of some food that otherwise could be owned on Passover. Thus, Milk, that may have some accidental Hametz in it that is purchased before Passover, and unopened until the holiday begins (and after the declaration is made) can be served on Passover but new milk, purchased on the holiday itself, must be certified to be free of any traces of Hametz.
Before Passover begins, we must do a through removal of all Hametz, and then search for the last crumbs the evening before the Seder. (When Passover begins on Saturday night, the search is done Thursday evening and you should consult a Rabbi as to what to do with the Hametz you need to observe Shabbat.)
Any willful violation of the laws of Hametz are very serious infractions, they are violations of a commandment of the Torah. Hametz that remains unfound and discovered after Passover is over is to be destroyed and no benefit can be derived from it because of the declaration recited at the beginning of the holiday. This is an enactment of the Sages and not a Torah commandment.
Monday, December 24, 2007
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
9-5768: Mitzvah N-1
Talmidav Shel Aharon
9-5768: Mitzvah N-1
December 18, 2007
Negative Mitzvah 1 – It is a negative commandment not to eat the sinew of the thigh-vein
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “Therefore the children of Israel do not eat the sinew of the thigh-vein.” (Gen. 32:33) it applies to pure [kosher] domestic and untamed animals, and it applies also to an embryo – both to the right thigh and the left. There are two sinews: the inner one, near the socket of the hipbone is forbidden by the law of the Torah. The rest of the inner sinew, which is not about the socket, and the entire upper sinew, with the fat on them and on the sinew of the thigh-vein, along with the other sinews and membranes, are forbidden by the ruling of the Sages. If someone ate the sinew of the thigh-vein from a n’velah [an animal that died from a cause other than Kosher ritual slaughter] or from a t’refah [an animal that was mortally wounded or ill], he violates two prohibitions. (Eating forbidden meat and eating the thigh-vein) By the Oral Tradition we know that it is permissible to derive [other] benefit from the sinew. It is in force everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
This entire prohibition is derived from the outcome of the wrestling match between Jacob and the mysterious opponent in the middle of the night. Jacob is wounded in this match and the text tells us that because he was wounded in the hip, we do not eat the thigh-vein to this very day. It is the third of only three Mitzvot that are derived in the book of Genesis.
There was a time when Kosher Butchers were very skilled and were able to remove the thigh-vein and the Rabbis permitted the hind legs of large mammals when they were killed properly. This is no longer the case. While there are a few butchers who are so skilled, modern kosher supervisors no longer permit meat from the hindquarter. This is part of the ongoing process of making Kashrut more and more stringent. Sometimes it seems as if everything that was once permitted, is now forbidden so that there should never be a question raised about the Kashrut of meat. It is a sorry state of affairs.
Note that there are two categories in this Mitzvah. One part is forbidden by the explicit command of the Torah and one is forbidden by a ruling of the Sages (in this case the Sages of the Talmud). Since it may not be clear exactly what the Torah has forbidden, they forbid all the veins in the hindquarter. Note that you can’t eat the thigh-vein from a non-kosher animal either, nor from a kosher animal that is killed improperly.
Finally, a note on the “Oral Tradition”. The Torah was given in written form to Moses on Mt. Sinai. Jewish tradition tells us that Moses also received an “oral tradition” at the same time (it would not take 40 days and night just to get a book. Moses spent the time learning the Oral tradition.). Since there are many ways of interpreting the written law, the Oral Tradition comes to tell us how the written law is to be applied. In our case, the written law says that we can not eat the thigh-vein. But does this also mean we can not derive any benefit from it? The Oral Tradition tells us that we can indeed benefit from it. This allows us to use the meat we cannot eat as food for other animals or to sell to non-Jews who are permitted to eat it. The money we raise from this sale can be used to support our family or to give to Tzedakah. If this were not permitted, the meat would have to be thrown away
9-5768: Mitzvah N-1
December 18, 2007
Negative Mitzvah 1 – It is a negative commandment not to eat the sinew of the thigh-vein
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “Therefore the children of Israel do not eat the sinew of the thigh-vein.” (Gen. 32:33) it applies to pure [kosher] domestic and untamed animals, and it applies also to an embryo – both to the right thigh and the left. There are two sinews: the inner one, near the socket of the hipbone is forbidden by the law of the Torah. The rest of the inner sinew, which is not about the socket, and the entire upper sinew, with the fat on them and on the sinew of the thigh-vein, along with the other sinews and membranes, are forbidden by the ruling of the Sages. If someone ate the sinew of the thigh-vein from a n’velah [an animal that died from a cause other than Kosher ritual slaughter] or from a t’refah [an animal that was mortally wounded or ill], he violates two prohibitions. (Eating forbidden meat and eating the thigh-vein) By the Oral Tradition we know that it is permissible to derive [other] benefit from the sinew. It is in force everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
This entire prohibition is derived from the outcome of the wrestling match between Jacob and the mysterious opponent in the middle of the night. Jacob is wounded in this match and the text tells us that because he was wounded in the hip, we do not eat the thigh-vein to this very day. It is the third of only three Mitzvot that are derived in the book of Genesis.
There was a time when Kosher Butchers were very skilled and were able to remove the thigh-vein and the Rabbis permitted the hind legs of large mammals when they were killed properly. This is no longer the case. While there are a few butchers who are so skilled, modern kosher supervisors no longer permit meat from the hindquarter. This is part of the ongoing process of making Kashrut more and more stringent. Sometimes it seems as if everything that was once permitted, is now forbidden so that there should never be a question raised about the Kashrut of meat. It is a sorry state of affairs.
Note that there are two categories in this Mitzvah. One part is forbidden by the explicit command of the Torah and one is forbidden by a ruling of the Sages (in this case the Sages of the Talmud). Since it may not be clear exactly what the Torah has forbidden, they forbid all the veins in the hindquarter. Note that you can’t eat the thigh-vein from a non-kosher animal either, nor from a kosher animal that is killed improperly.
Finally, a note on the “Oral Tradition”. The Torah was given in written form to Moses on Mt. Sinai. Jewish tradition tells us that Moses also received an “oral tradition” at the same time (it would not take 40 days and night just to get a book. Moses spent the time learning the Oral tradition.). Since there are many ways of interpreting the written law, the Oral Tradition comes to tell us how the written law is to be applied. In our case, the written law says that we can not eat the thigh-vein. But does this also mean we can not derive any benefit from it? The Oral Tradition tells us that we can indeed benefit from it. This allows us to use the meat we cannot eat as food for other animals or to sell to non-Jews who are permitted to eat it. The money we raise from this sale can be used to support our family or to give to Tzedakah. If this were not permitted, the meat would have to be thrown away
Monday, December 10, 2007
8-5768: Introduction to the Negative Mitzvot
Talmidav Shel Aharon
8-5768: Introduction to the Negative Mitzvot
December 10, 2007
On August 29, 2005, as the year 5764 was drawing to a close, I began a new volume of what we called then, “Halacha L’Moshe MiSinai. I had spent the previous two years commenting on different aspect of Jewish Law. I had just returned from my three month Sabbatical and was ready to start something new with this list. In those days I was posting a lesson and sending it by Email to those who has subscribed. In the past 28 months I have left my position at Temple Sinai of Hollywood, started my new position at the Temple of Aaron in St. Paul and changed the name from “Halacha L’Moshe MiSinai” to “Talmidav shel Aharon. I also started posting the lessons to a blog so that the older lessons could be archived. I want to again thank my son, Eitan, for his help in showing me how easy it is to write a weekly blog.
Taking advise from my wife, Michelle, I decided to begin to introduce my students to the work of the Hafetz Hayyim, (for his biography see HMS 2,2 5755) in particular, his list of commandments that could be followed in our day. We are all taught that there are 613 commandments that Jews are supposed to follow. 248 are positive commandments (a number, according to the Sages is equal to the bones in a human body) and the other 365 are negative commandments (a number, according to the Sages, equal to the number of days in a solar year). These are a lot of commandments that G-d has placed on our shoulders, but Rabbis, including the Hafetz Hayyim, understand that most of these commandments are not possible to perform in our day and age. Some of them were only possible to perform when the Temple of Jerusalem was in existence. Since it was destroyed in 70 CE, we no longer can observe these Mitzvot. Some of them relate only to the land of Israel, and if we do not live in the land of Israel, we are exempt from these Mitzvot.
The Hafetz Hayyim chose to comment only on the positive and negative commandments that are still in force for all of us who are still living in the lands of our dispersion. We have just completed the 77th positive commandment concerning Amalek and with it we have finished the positive commandments. It has taken us about 2 1/3 years to complete this task. I can only add that positive commandments are in effect as long as there is no danger to our life or limb. In times of danger to our health, we are commanded to skip the positive Mitzvot until such a time as the danger has passed, and then we pick up where we left off. Hanukah is a great time to contemplate this. When the Maccabees recaptured Jerusalem from the Syrian-Greeks, the set out to re-purify the Temple and begin to worship there as they did before they were forced into the hills. When the Temple was ready to be rededicated, the looked to see what holiday they could celebrate in the middle of the winter. According to the Book of Maccabees, the last holiday they had missed was Sukkot, a seven day holiday with an eighth day holiday at the end. The Maccabees then re-lit the candelabra and celebrated Sukkot for eight days. This may be the real origin of our eight-day festival of lights.
Women also find that they are exempt from Mitzvot, which are positive, and time bound. This was a nod by the ancient Sages to women who have responsibilities that are not always bound by a set time or schedule.
In the second part of his book on the Mitzvot, the Hafetz Hayyim will cover 194 negative commandments. As if often the case with law, it is far easier to say what one cannot do than to say what is permitted. Since the 613 commandments have far more negative than positive commandments, we should not be surprised to find that there are more negative commandments in effect than positive ones still in effect. We should also note that there are far fewer exemptions from the negative Mitzvot than the positive ones. If G-d tells us that there are some things that we cannot do, than we just don’t do them. I should also note that because there are so many negative commandments still in effect, it is also not permitted to make up more of them. There are already enough things we are not allowed to do, we will be eventually called to account for the things we were permitted to do and yet forbid ourselves from doing it. This is to prevent false acts of piety and fanaticism. I can’t say that this is a perfect system, but it is the one we are working will.
Just a note, when I checked the archives, I noted that HMS 2.1 is dated 5755. That is a typographical error. It should read 5765. I will later change the blog archives to correct that error.
As always, if you know of someone who wants to read the lessons, feel free to send them the link to this blog or to write to me at hmsinai@aol.com and ask to be sent a reminder when new lessons are posted.
As always, your comments are welcome and will be added to the end of the lesson by the end of the week.
Thank you for your commitment to Jewish LearningRabbi K.
8-5768: Introduction to the Negative Mitzvot
December 10, 2007
On August 29, 2005, as the year 5764 was drawing to a close, I began a new volume of what we called then, “Halacha L’Moshe MiSinai. I had spent the previous two years commenting on different aspect of Jewish Law. I had just returned from my three month Sabbatical and was ready to start something new with this list. In those days I was posting a lesson and sending it by Email to those who has subscribed. In the past 28 months I have left my position at Temple Sinai of Hollywood, started my new position at the Temple of Aaron in St. Paul and changed the name from “Halacha L’Moshe MiSinai” to “Talmidav shel Aharon. I also started posting the lessons to a blog so that the older lessons could be archived. I want to again thank my son, Eitan, for his help in showing me how easy it is to write a weekly blog.
Taking advise from my wife, Michelle, I decided to begin to introduce my students to the work of the Hafetz Hayyim, (for his biography see HMS 2,2 5755) in particular, his list of commandments that could be followed in our day. We are all taught that there are 613 commandments that Jews are supposed to follow. 248 are positive commandments (a number, according to the Sages is equal to the bones in a human body) and the other 365 are negative commandments (a number, according to the Sages, equal to the number of days in a solar year). These are a lot of commandments that G-d has placed on our shoulders, but Rabbis, including the Hafetz Hayyim, understand that most of these commandments are not possible to perform in our day and age. Some of them were only possible to perform when the Temple of Jerusalem was in existence. Since it was destroyed in 70 CE, we no longer can observe these Mitzvot. Some of them relate only to the land of Israel, and if we do not live in the land of Israel, we are exempt from these Mitzvot.
The Hafetz Hayyim chose to comment only on the positive and negative commandments that are still in force for all of us who are still living in the lands of our dispersion. We have just completed the 77th positive commandment concerning Amalek and with it we have finished the positive commandments. It has taken us about 2 1/3 years to complete this task. I can only add that positive commandments are in effect as long as there is no danger to our life or limb. In times of danger to our health, we are commanded to skip the positive Mitzvot until such a time as the danger has passed, and then we pick up where we left off. Hanukah is a great time to contemplate this. When the Maccabees recaptured Jerusalem from the Syrian-Greeks, the set out to re-purify the Temple and begin to worship there as they did before they were forced into the hills. When the Temple was ready to be rededicated, the looked to see what holiday they could celebrate in the middle of the winter. According to the Book of Maccabees, the last holiday they had missed was Sukkot, a seven day holiday with an eighth day holiday at the end. The Maccabees then re-lit the candelabra and celebrated Sukkot for eight days. This may be the real origin of our eight-day festival of lights.
Women also find that they are exempt from Mitzvot, which are positive, and time bound. This was a nod by the ancient Sages to women who have responsibilities that are not always bound by a set time or schedule.
In the second part of his book on the Mitzvot, the Hafetz Hayyim will cover 194 negative commandments. As if often the case with law, it is far easier to say what one cannot do than to say what is permitted. Since the 613 commandments have far more negative than positive commandments, we should not be surprised to find that there are more negative commandments in effect than positive ones still in effect. We should also note that there are far fewer exemptions from the negative Mitzvot than the positive ones. If G-d tells us that there are some things that we cannot do, than we just don’t do them. I should also note that because there are so many negative commandments still in effect, it is also not permitted to make up more of them. There are already enough things we are not allowed to do, we will be eventually called to account for the things we were permitted to do and yet forbid ourselves from doing it. This is to prevent false acts of piety and fanaticism. I can’t say that this is a perfect system, but it is the one we are working will.
Just a note, when I checked the archives, I noted that HMS 2.1 is dated 5755. That is a typographical error. It should read 5765. I will later change the blog archives to correct that error.
As always, if you know of someone who wants to read the lessons, feel free to send them the link to this blog or to write to me at hmsinai@aol.com and ask to be sent a reminder when new lessons are posted.
As always, your comments are welcome and will be added to the end of the lesson by the end of the week.
Thank you for your commitment to Jewish LearningRabbi K.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
7-5768: Mitzvah 76-77
Talmidav Shel Aharon
7-5768: Mitzvah 76-77
December 4, 2007
Mitzvah 76 – It is a positive commandment to remember the action that Amalek took against us.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “Remember what Amalek did to you ” (Deut. 25:17This means to remember orally, in spoken words, his evil deeds and his ambush against us, so as to bestir our heart to hate him. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
Mitzvah 77 – It is a positive commandment to decimate the descendants of Amalek.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek. (Deut. 25:19) However, we do not know who are the people of Amalek, until the prophet Elijah will come and inform us who they are; and then we will wipe out all remembrance of him from under heaven. May Hashem grant us to see the arrival of Elijah the Prophet and our righteous Messiah speedily in our time; Amen
All the positive commandments in effect at the present time have been completed, their number being seventy-seven.
And so the last two positive commandments are perhaps the simplest and the most difficult at the same time.
Who is Amalek? According to the Torah, the people of Israel fresh from their salvation at the Red Sea are crossing the desert on their way to Mt. Sinai and the Promised Land. Suddenly, the Amalekites attack our people without warning. According to Deuteronomy, they attacked from the rear, where the weakest and the stragglers could be found. Our people stand their ground and counter-attack and rout the Amalekites in a daylong battle. Moses then teaches that because they attacked in such a cowardly manner against the people blessed by G-d, G-d has ordained that the Israelites should remember that Amalekites must be destroyed once and for all, and none of them shall remain.
In the book of Samuel, it is recorded that the first Israelite king, Saul, is commanded to finish this work. It is to be a complete destruction; nothing of the Amalekites shall remain. Saul does part of the job, the men, women and children of the Amalekites are killed but he keeps the King alive and brings back the cattle for an offering to G-d. G-d is so angry that Samuel is to tell Saul that since he has disobeyed the commandment of G-d, then he will lose his kingship to someone else. From that moment on, it is all downhill for Saul.
One would think that if Saul did such a good job, than why would this Mitzvah still be on the books. According to the Rabbis of the Talmud, before the king of Amalek was killed by Samuel, he had a chance to impregnate one more woman. From this union descends every person who has ever hated Jews. Of course we can not prove this so we wait for Elijah, who will come just before the Messiah and let us know who needs to be killed to, once and for all, wipe the people of Amalek off the face of the earth.
Let us be clear. We have no idea who the descendants of Amalek are today so we have no right to kill anyone. That being said, we still have the stain of Genocide that needs to be addressed. As a people who have been slaughtered, men women and children, in genocide, it is hard to imagine that we are commanded by G-d to turn and do this to some other people. It is hard to contemplate a good G-d who would command such an action. It is hard to see this as a religious obligation that falls on our shoulders.
I can offer two answers to these questions. First, it is not right to put modern theology on ancient stories. Amalek and Israel were mortal enemies. Israel got the upper hand and wiped them out. That was war in ancient times and it is not the rules we fight under today. Jews have called many anti-Semites “Amalek” over the centuries, but we never again committed an act of genocide to complete this task. The Sages of the Talmud understood that there would always be people who hate us so they kept on the books the duty to remember those who have a senseless hatred of the Jewish people and to work to end their prominence in the world.
Second, that we must continue our work to end this kind of senseless hatred by remembering that, when those who hate us got the opportunity, they killed the innocent of our people, the weak and the stragglers. Such people do not deserve mercy but should be hunted down. We must not overlook their acts of terror and retaliate when the time is right, and never forget our duty to avenge these barbaric acts. We must not kill women and children and innocent bystanders anymore, but those who actively hate and kill, must be neutralized so they can no longer hurt us. It is a matter self-preservation. If we are worried about future generations of Amalekites, than we must wait for Elijah to show us who these haters are so we can deal with them appropriately. In this way Judaism addresses this kind of deep evil and attempts to root it out of Jewish life.
Finally, we come to the end of the positive commandments. Next we will begin, with G-d’s help, to explain the negative commandments. Perhaps, because of our studies, we will be privileged to see the arrival of the Messiah and the beginning of an era with no more war and bloodshed.
7-5768: Mitzvah 76-77
December 4, 2007
Mitzvah 76 – It is a positive commandment to remember the action that Amalek took against us.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “Remember what Amalek did to you ” (Deut. 25:17This means to remember orally, in spoken words, his evil deeds and his ambush against us, so as to bestir our heart to hate him. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
Mitzvah 77 – It is a positive commandment to decimate the descendants of Amalek.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek. (Deut. 25:19) However, we do not know who are the people of Amalek, until the prophet Elijah will come and inform us who they are; and then we will wipe out all remembrance of him from under heaven. May Hashem grant us to see the arrival of Elijah the Prophet and our righteous Messiah speedily in our time; Amen
All the positive commandments in effect at the present time have been completed, their number being seventy-seven.
And so the last two positive commandments are perhaps the simplest and the most difficult at the same time.
Who is Amalek? According to the Torah, the people of Israel fresh from their salvation at the Red Sea are crossing the desert on their way to Mt. Sinai and the Promised Land. Suddenly, the Amalekites attack our people without warning. According to Deuteronomy, they attacked from the rear, where the weakest and the stragglers could be found. Our people stand their ground and counter-attack and rout the Amalekites in a daylong battle. Moses then teaches that because they attacked in such a cowardly manner against the people blessed by G-d, G-d has ordained that the Israelites should remember that Amalekites must be destroyed once and for all, and none of them shall remain.
In the book of Samuel, it is recorded that the first Israelite king, Saul, is commanded to finish this work. It is to be a complete destruction; nothing of the Amalekites shall remain. Saul does part of the job, the men, women and children of the Amalekites are killed but he keeps the King alive and brings back the cattle for an offering to G-d. G-d is so angry that Samuel is to tell Saul that since he has disobeyed the commandment of G-d, then he will lose his kingship to someone else. From that moment on, it is all downhill for Saul.
One would think that if Saul did such a good job, than why would this Mitzvah still be on the books. According to the Rabbis of the Talmud, before the king of Amalek was killed by Samuel, he had a chance to impregnate one more woman. From this union descends every person who has ever hated Jews. Of course we can not prove this so we wait for Elijah, who will come just before the Messiah and let us know who needs to be killed to, once and for all, wipe the people of Amalek off the face of the earth.
Let us be clear. We have no idea who the descendants of Amalek are today so we have no right to kill anyone. That being said, we still have the stain of Genocide that needs to be addressed. As a people who have been slaughtered, men women and children, in genocide, it is hard to imagine that we are commanded by G-d to turn and do this to some other people. It is hard to contemplate a good G-d who would command such an action. It is hard to see this as a religious obligation that falls on our shoulders.
I can offer two answers to these questions. First, it is not right to put modern theology on ancient stories. Amalek and Israel were mortal enemies. Israel got the upper hand and wiped them out. That was war in ancient times and it is not the rules we fight under today. Jews have called many anti-Semites “Amalek” over the centuries, but we never again committed an act of genocide to complete this task. The Sages of the Talmud understood that there would always be people who hate us so they kept on the books the duty to remember those who have a senseless hatred of the Jewish people and to work to end their prominence in the world.
Second, that we must continue our work to end this kind of senseless hatred by remembering that, when those who hate us got the opportunity, they killed the innocent of our people, the weak and the stragglers. Such people do not deserve mercy but should be hunted down. We must not overlook their acts of terror and retaliate when the time is right, and never forget our duty to avenge these barbaric acts. We must not kill women and children and innocent bystanders anymore, but those who actively hate and kill, must be neutralized so they can no longer hurt us. It is a matter self-preservation. If we are worried about future generations of Amalekites, than we must wait for Elijah to show us who these haters are so we can deal with them appropriately. In this way Judaism addresses this kind of deep evil and attempts to root it out of Jewish life.
Finally, we come to the end of the positive commandments. Next we will begin, with G-d’s help, to explain the negative commandments. Perhaps, because of our studies, we will be privileged to see the arrival of the Messiah and the beginning of an era with no more war and bloodshed.
Monday, November 26, 2007
6-5768: Mitzvah 75
Talmidav Shel Aharon
6-5768: Mitzvah 75
November 26, 2007
Mitzvah 75 – It is a positive commandment to make a parapet about one’s roof, and to remove every stumbling block and possible cause of accident from one’s house.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “then you shall make a parapet for our roof, that you shall not bring blood upon your house, etc.” (Deut. 22:8) Whoever leaves his roof without a parapet disobeys a positive commandment. So too with anything that constitutes a stumbling block, posing danger of death, such as a well or a pit. A barrier ten handbreadths high has to be made about it, and the barrier has to be strong enough to allow leaning on it without its collapsing. It is also forbidden to raise a bad [vicious] dog in one’s house. In Sefer Haredim, it is written, “When one bears this religious duty in mind every day, and sees if it requires any repair or improvement, it will be reckoned for him as though he fulfills the duty every day. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
The Sages have taken a very simple law and expanded it into one of the most important teachings in Judaism. Let us first examine the law. In ancient Israel, most houses had flat roofs that served as a meeting place and even a sleeping place when the weather was good. If the weather was warm outside or too hot inside, families would gather on the roof to escape the heat. The parapet, the small wall around the edge of the roof was a safety measure, to insure that nobody would accidentally fall off. Clearly it has to be strong enough to lean against. A roof that had no parapet was a serious accident waiting to happen.
The Sages of the Talmud however, saw that this law as the basis for an entire corpus of safety legislation. The end of the verse from Deuteronomy, for the sages, clearly implies that anything that may bring “blood upon your house” had to be addressed with proper safety measures. If you dug a pit, you had to put a fence around it so nobody would fall in. The same would apply if you dug a well. If you had a vicious dog, you could not rely on the chain or rope to prevent an accident. One could not thus own a vicious dog, nor keep an ox that had a history of goring other people. If you could not restrain your vicious animals, you were liable for any damages they caused.
It is not a long stretch to see that all manner of safety needs can be added to this law. A Jew should not live in an apartment that does not have child guards to prevent a child from leaning on a screen and falling out the window. One should not live in a tall building without proper fire escapes, or smoke detectors or even carbon monoxide detectors if they are appropriate. You should not chain your doors shut or place bars on the widows without making fire escape plans explicit. The fire plans themselves are included in this law. Poisons in the home would have to be clearly marked and kept out of reach of children. And homes with small children should be “baby proofed”. One could even say that it includes a provision that would require all passengers in a car driven by a Jew to wear seat belts.
If the prime directive of Judaism is to preserve life, than clearly these safety rules are designed to do just that. To endanger life would be to violate this prime directive. Little wonder that the Sages expanded this law to include all manner of safety instruction. They felt that everyone was responsible for the well being of those who lived in or were visiting their home.
6-5768: Mitzvah 75
November 26, 2007
Mitzvah 75 – It is a positive commandment to make a parapet about one’s roof, and to remove every stumbling block and possible cause of accident from one’s house.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “then you shall make a parapet for our roof, that you shall not bring blood upon your house, etc.” (Deut. 22:8) Whoever leaves his roof without a parapet disobeys a positive commandment. So too with anything that constitutes a stumbling block, posing danger of death, such as a well or a pit. A barrier ten handbreadths high has to be made about it, and the barrier has to be strong enough to allow leaning on it without its collapsing. It is also forbidden to raise a bad [vicious] dog in one’s house. In Sefer Haredim, it is written, “When one bears this religious duty in mind every day, and sees if it requires any repair or improvement, it will be reckoned for him as though he fulfills the duty every day. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
The Sages have taken a very simple law and expanded it into one of the most important teachings in Judaism. Let us first examine the law. In ancient Israel, most houses had flat roofs that served as a meeting place and even a sleeping place when the weather was good. If the weather was warm outside or too hot inside, families would gather on the roof to escape the heat. The parapet, the small wall around the edge of the roof was a safety measure, to insure that nobody would accidentally fall off. Clearly it has to be strong enough to lean against. A roof that had no parapet was a serious accident waiting to happen.
The Sages of the Talmud however, saw that this law as the basis for an entire corpus of safety legislation. The end of the verse from Deuteronomy, for the sages, clearly implies that anything that may bring “blood upon your house” had to be addressed with proper safety measures. If you dug a pit, you had to put a fence around it so nobody would fall in. The same would apply if you dug a well. If you had a vicious dog, you could not rely on the chain or rope to prevent an accident. One could not thus own a vicious dog, nor keep an ox that had a history of goring other people. If you could not restrain your vicious animals, you were liable for any damages they caused.
It is not a long stretch to see that all manner of safety needs can be added to this law. A Jew should not live in an apartment that does not have child guards to prevent a child from leaning on a screen and falling out the window. One should not live in a tall building without proper fire escapes, or smoke detectors or even carbon monoxide detectors if they are appropriate. You should not chain your doors shut or place bars on the widows without making fire escape plans explicit. The fire plans themselves are included in this law. Poisons in the home would have to be clearly marked and kept out of reach of children. And homes with small children should be “baby proofed”. One could even say that it includes a provision that would require all passengers in a car driven by a Jew to wear seat belts.
If the prime directive of Judaism is to preserve life, than clearly these safety rules are designed to do just that. To endanger life would be to violate this prime directive. Little wonder that the Sages expanded this law to include all manner of safety instruction. They felt that everyone was responsible for the well being of those who lived in or were visiting their home.
Monday, November 19, 2007
5-5768: Mitzvah 74
Talmidav Shel Aharon
5-5768: Mitzvah 74
November 19, 2007
Mitzvah 74 – It is a positive commandment of “sending away from the nest.”
Hafetz Hayim: Which means that if someone finds a bird’s nest on the way, with the mother-bird sitting on the fledglings or on the eggs, and he wishes to take them, he as to send away the mother-bird first and take them afterward; for Scripture says, “you shall surely send the dam away” (Deut. 22:7) and afterward, “and the young you may take for yourself.” (Ibid) The way to send it off is by taking hold of its wings and making it fly. If one sent it away and it returned, even many times, he is yet obligated to send it off. If it was flying about, if its wings touched the nest, he would have the duty to send it away; and if not, he would be free of any obligation to send it off. The requirement of “sending away from the nest” applies only to a pure (kosher) fowl, and one which is not prepared (not in his possession – which means that a person finds it on the way in some tree or on the ground); and specifically with fledglings which do not fly as yet and need their mother-bird, or with eggs that are not infertile and rotting. If a person transgresses and takes the mother-bird with the young, he is to fulfill the positive commandment and send the dam off. If he ritually slew the mother-bird or it died before he sent it off, so that he can no longer fulfill the positive commandment, he has thus violated a negative commandment. So likewise if someone came along and seized the mother-bird from his hand and sent it away, or it fled out of his hand without his knowledge (against his wish)- he is to receive whiplashes for violating the negative commandment, since he plainly did not observe the positive commandment. If he took the mother-bird and clipped its wings so that it could not fly and then he sent it off, he should be given whiplashes for disobedience, and he is to keep it with him until its wings grow back, and then he is to send it away. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
The Torah is very clear on this law. That is why the Hafetz Hayim is so direct about it. It is one of the few laws in the Torah that have a reward for observance. The Torah insists that one who sends the mother-bird away will live a long life.
This is one of a series of laws that are part of the rules concerning “Tzar Baalei Hayyim” “Pain given to animals”. The Torah understands that if we are cruel to animals, than it becomes easier to be cruel to each other. A mother-bird will defend her eggs and fledglings, a sign that she has “maternal” concerns for her offspring. It would be cruel not to push the mother aside and take her eggs. It would be cruel to the mother bird, and an act of cruelty on out part if we fail in this task. If we can be so cruel to another animal, it is only fitting that such a person receives lashes for his or her insensitivity. Perhaps the pain suffered by lashes will help instill a kind of concern for the pain he or she causes others, human and animal. As an act of kindness to animals, we send away the mother-bird, we don’t cook a baby animal in its mother’s milk and we don’t yoke an ox with a donkey when plowing since the stronger one will have to drag along the weaker animal. We don’t even allow the muzzling of an ox on the threshing floor since to be working with the grain and not allowed to eat it would also be cruel to the ox. We have to be sensitive to the needs of our animals like we would want to be sensitive to the needs of those humans who work for us.
I would be remiss if I did not mention the way this law of the mother-bird was used for a larger problem in Jewish Law. The reward for sending the dam away is that you receive long life. The story is that Rabbi Elisha ben Abulya was walking one day and saw a man holding a ladder by a tree. His son was on the ladder reaching for a bird’s nest. The father said, “Remember to send the mother bird away” and the Rabbi noted that this child would live a long time since he was obeying two commandments that have the same reward, Sending the mother bird away, and honoring parents both have the reward of long life. The boy sent the mother bird away, and then, tragically, he lost his footing, fell from the tree and died. It is said that this was the cause that caused Rabbi Elisha ben Abulya to become an apostate. G-d had not fulfilled the reward and suddenly the Rabbi could no longer believe in G-d. If G-d could not be relied upon to fulfill the reward, then “There is no Judge and there is no Justice” thus Elisha abandoned his faith. (There is a classic book on this issue, “As a Driven Leaf” by Milton Steinberg. This moment is the center of the book and it deals with the issues of G-d in the world and our experience of G-d. It is one of my favorite books of all time)
The issue has not gone away after all these years. Why bad things happen to good people is one of the realities of our world and it insures that our faith is always subject to question and debate. Can we believe in G-d in spite of the injustice of this world? If not, how is faith possible? If we can, how can we explain the injustice? Abraham’s demand that “The Judge of the world act justly” is a cornerstone of Judaism. Without it all of Jewish Law is impossible. There are many answers that have been come forth over the centuries. If we are to be secure in our faith, we will need to find an answer for ourselves lest we slide into heresy, as did Elisha. The stakes are very high, and we will need to be honest and considered in our answers. I don’t have an answer for you; Judaism demands that you study to find the answer that works best for you.
5-5768: Mitzvah 74
November 19, 2007
Mitzvah 74 – It is a positive commandment of “sending away from the nest.”
Hafetz Hayim: Which means that if someone finds a bird’s nest on the way, with the mother-bird sitting on the fledglings or on the eggs, and he wishes to take them, he as to send away the mother-bird first and take them afterward; for Scripture says, “you shall surely send the dam away” (Deut. 22:7) and afterward, “and the young you may take for yourself.” (Ibid) The way to send it off is by taking hold of its wings and making it fly. If one sent it away and it returned, even many times, he is yet obligated to send it off. If it was flying about, if its wings touched the nest, he would have the duty to send it away; and if not, he would be free of any obligation to send it off. The requirement of “sending away from the nest” applies only to a pure (kosher) fowl, and one which is not prepared (not in his possession – which means that a person finds it on the way in some tree or on the ground); and specifically with fledglings which do not fly as yet and need their mother-bird, or with eggs that are not infertile and rotting. If a person transgresses and takes the mother-bird with the young, he is to fulfill the positive commandment and send the dam off. If he ritually slew the mother-bird or it died before he sent it off, so that he can no longer fulfill the positive commandment, he has thus violated a negative commandment. So likewise if someone came along and seized the mother-bird from his hand and sent it away, or it fled out of his hand without his knowledge (against his wish)- he is to receive whiplashes for violating the negative commandment, since he plainly did not observe the positive commandment. If he took the mother-bird and clipped its wings so that it could not fly and then he sent it off, he should be given whiplashes for disobedience, and he is to keep it with him until its wings grow back, and then he is to send it away. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
The Torah is very clear on this law. That is why the Hafetz Hayim is so direct about it. It is one of the few laws in the Torah that have a reward for observance. The Torah insists that one who sends the mother-bird away will live a long life.
This is one of a series of laws that are part of the rules concerning “Tzar Baalei Hayyim” “Pain given to animals”. The Torah understands that if we are cruel to animals, than it becomes easier to be cruel to each other. A mother-bird will defend her eggs and fledglings, a sign that she has “maternal” concerns for her offspring. It would be cruel not to push the mother aside and take her eggs. It would be cruel to the mother bird, and an act of cruelty on out part if we fail in this task. If we can be so cruel to another animal, it is only fitting that such a person receives lashes for his or her insensitivity. Perhaps the pain suffered by lashes will help instill a kind of concern for the pain he or she causes others, human and animal. As an act of kindness to animals, we send away the mother-bird, we don’t cook a baby animal in its mother’s milk and we don’t yoke an ox with a donkey when plowing since the stronger one will have to drag along the weaker animal. We don’t even allow the muzzling of an ox on the threshing floor since to be working with the grain and not allowed to eat it would also be cruel to the ox. We have to be sensitive to the needs of our animals like we would want to be sensitive to the needs of those humans who work for us.
I would be remiss if I did not mention the way this law of the mother-bird was used for a larger problem in Jewish Law. The reward for sending the dam away is that you receive long life. The story is that Rabbi Elisha ben Abulya was walking one day and saw a man holding a ladder by a tree. His son was on the ladder reaching for a bird’s nest. The father said, “Remember to send the mother bird away” and the Rabbi noted that this child would live a long time since he was obeying two commandments that have the same reward, Sending the mother bird away, and honoring parents both have the reward of long life. The boy sent the mother bird away, and then, tragically, he lost his footing, fell from the tree and died. It is said that this was the cause that caused Rabbi Elisha ben Abulya to become an apostate. G-d had not fulfilled the reward and suddenly the Rabbi could no longer believe in G-d. If G-d could not be relied upon to fulfill the reward, then “There is no Judge and there is no Justice” thus Elisha abandoned his faith. (There is a classic book on this issue, “As a Driven Leaf” by Milton Steinberg. This moment is the center of the book and it deals with the issues of G-d in the world and our experience of G-d. It is one of my favorite books of all time)
The issue has not gone away after all these years. Why bad things happen to good people is one of the realities of our world and it insures that our faith is always subject to question and debate. Can we believe in G-d in spite of the injustice of this world? If not, how is faith possible? If we can, how can we explain the injustice? Abraham’s demand that “The Judge of the world act justly” is a cornerstone of Judaism. Without it all of Jewish Law is impossible. There are many answers that have been come forth over the centuries. If we are to be secure in our faith, we will need to find an answer for ourselves lest we slide into heresy, as did Elisha. The stakes are very high, and we will need to be honest and considered in our answers. I don’t have an answer for you; Judaism demands that you study to find the answer that works best for you.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
4-5768: Mitzvah 73
Talmidav Shel Aharon
4-5768: Mitzvah 73
November 11, 2007
Mitzvah 73 – It is a positive commandment to render judgment about heritages [inheritance of landed property]
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “If a man dies and has no son, then you shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter.” (Num. 27:8). However, a son has priority over a daughter; and all one’s male descendants have priority over a daughter. A daughter and all her male descendants take priority over the dead man’s father. Included in this commandment is the rule that a firstborn son is to inherit a double share of the legacy. And a husband inherits his wife’s property buy the law of the Sages, taking precedence over all others in her legacy. It applies everywhere and in every time.
The Torah is very clear about the laws of inheritance. Only sons can inherit from their father. Their first responsibility is to their unmarried sisters and they must provide for them until all the daughters are married even if it means the sons must go begging in the street. If there are no sons, then grandsons inherit down the male line. If there are no male descendants, then the legacy passes down to the daughters according to the ruling given to the daughters of Zelofchad in the Book of Numbers. If the daughter has died, it goes down her male descendants. If there are none, than the man’s father is next to inherit. It goes down his male line.
According to the Torah, the legacy is divided into equal parts according to the number of sons (or daughters if there are none) and the firstborn son gets a double portion and the rest get a single portion. Thus if there are three sons, the estate is divided into four equal parts, two going to the firstborn and one each to the other two sons.
Finally, the Sages noted that there is nothing in the Torah about what happens to a wife’s estate when she dies. They ruled that her entire estate is transferred to her husband upon her death. This assumes that she dies before her husband. If he dies first, she keeps her property and collects the 200 zuzim in land that is promised in her ketubah. This legacy is paid even before the sons inherit. It is the first charge against the estate, even before his other creditors.
This is how Jewish law deals with inheritance. There is no probate and the order cannot be changed. Yet we note that Jacob buys the birthright, the double portion from Esau and both Abraham (who gives the double portion to Isaac and not Ishmael) and Jacob (who gives the double portion to Joseph not Reuvan) ignore this law.
Modern Jewish Law avoids this whole arrangement by using the common will that acts as if the person will give his estate away as a gift to whomever he wishes and there is then nothing for anyone to inherit. In general, financial matters such as these follow the rules of the lands in which Jews live unless they have ritual significance. The laws of inheritance do not and that is why, while they remain in effect, they are most often ignored and an estate is divided according to the wishes expressed in the will of the deceased.
I am sure that if you are or were an attorney with a practice in family law, than all of this may be historically interesting. I am not aware that there is anyone today, who follows these laws.
4-5768: Mitzvah 73
November 11, 2007
Mitzvah 73 – It is a positive commandment to render judgment about heritages [inheritance of landed property]
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “If a man dies and has no son, then you shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter.” (Num. 27:8). However, a son has priority over a daughter; and all one’s male descendants have priority over a daughter. A daughter and all her male descendants take priority over the dead man’s father. Included in this commandment is the rule that a firstborn son is to inherit a double share of the legacy. And a husband inherits his wife’s property buy the law of the Sages, taking precedence over all others in her legacy. It applies everywhere and in every time.
The Torah is very clear about the laws of inheritance. Only sons can inherit from their father. Their first responsibility is to their unmarried sisters and they must provide for them until all the daughters are married even if it means the sons must go begging in the street. If there are no sons, then grandsons inherit down the male line. If there are no male descendants, then the legacy passes down to the daughters according to the ruling given to the daughters of Zelofchad in the Book of Numbers. If the daughter has died, it goes down her male descendants. If there are none, than the man’s father is next to inherit. It goes down his male line.
According to the Torah, the legacy is divided into equal parts according to the number of sons (or daughters if there are none) and the firstborn son gets a double portion and the rest get a single portion. Thus if there are three sons, the estate is divided into four equal parts, two going to the firstborn and one each to the other two sons.
Finally, the Sages noted that there is nothing in the Torah about what happens to a wife’s estate when she dies. They ruled that her entire estate is transferred to her husband upon her death. This assumes that she dies before her husband. If he dies first, she keeps her property and collects the 200 zuzim in land that is promised in her ketubah. This legacy is paid even before the sons inherit. It is the first charge against the estate, even before his other creditors.
This is how Jewish law deals with inheritance. There is no probate and the order cannot be changed. Yet we note that Jacob buys the birthright, the double portion from Esau and both Abraham (who gives the double portion to Isaac and not Ishmael) and Jacob (who gives the double portion to Joseph not Reuvan) ignore this law.
Modern Jewish Law avoids this whole arrangement by using the common will that acts as if the person will give his estate away as a gift to whomever he wishes and there is then nothing for anyone to inherit. In general, financial matters such as these follow the rules of the lands in which Jews live unless they have ritual significance. The laws of inheritance do not and that is why, while they remain in effect, they are most often ignored and an estate is divided according to the wishes expressed in the will of the deceased.
I am sure that if you are or were an attorney with a practice in family law, than all of this may be historically interesting. I am not aware that there is anyone today, who follows these laws.
Monday, October 22, 2007
3-5768: Mitzvah 72
Talmidav Shel Aharon
3-5768: Mitzvah 72
October 22, 2007
Mitzvah 72 – It is a positive commandment to upbraid a sinner
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “you shall surely rebuke your fellow.” (Lev. 19:17). He is to inform him that he does himself a wrong by his evil acts; and he is to inform him that he is telling hi this only for his own benefit, to bring him to life in the world-to-come. It is his duty to reprimand him until he listens to him, or until he strikes him and says “I will not listen to you.” There are some early authorities who are lenient about this, holding that it is enough until there is an angry retort [that the other gives us in rejecting our efforts]. But even the first view applies specifically when the person violates a prohibition by Torah law, and when he estimates that it will be effective for the future, that the other person will not do this thing again. Even a person of lower stature is duty-bound to rebuke a person of higher stature. Whoever has it in his power to oppose a sinner in his act and does not do so, fall victim to the guilt of is sin. Now, even though it is a religious duty to rebuke him [a sinner], he should not shame him first. It is a religious requirement to accept rebuke and to bear the chastiser affection. We find in the teachings of the Sages “that even if a person willfully violates a prohibition enacted by the Sages, it is permissible to call him a transgressor. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
This is a very difficult Mitzvah to perform because it has so many problems that can become attached to it. Let me first deal with the mechanics of the Mitzvah and then try and explain the problems.
This Mitzvah, on the surface is very straightforward. If we find someone whom we see is engaged in a violation of a Torah commandment, we have the obligation (not choice) to rebuke the actions of the person sinning and to try and get that person to do the right thing and not sin. It is so easy to sin and think that everyone is doing the same. When someone rebukes a sinner, that sinner can no longer think that his actions do not really matter. The idea is not to make anyone mad, but to get that person to contemplate his or her actions and to get them to do what is right. Such a person should really thank the one rebuking for saving his portion in the world to come. Additionally, it is possible to do a Mitzvah by mistake, but one must have intention to perform a sin. Rebuking a sinner forces that person to either change his or her ways or to affirm that it is his or her intention to sin, and thus they can no longer plead ignorance or error for their actions.
The first problem we detect with this Mitzvah is the intentions of the one who is doing the Rebuke. The rules of rebuking demand first of all, that the rebuke will have some effect on the Sinner. If the correction will be ignored, reviled or cause anger, than it is better to keep quiet and not rebuke. All the more so if the sinner is known to react violently to rebuke and could injure the one rebuking. Second, the one rebuking should have no vested interest in the sinner either continuing to sin or in changing his ways. If there is a hint of self-interest in the rebuke, someone else should do the rebuking. We don’t build ourselves up by tearing someone else down.
Not every sin is worthy of a rebuke. While we don’t try to rank one Mitzvah as being more important over another, note that the Hafetz Hayyim limits to rebuke to a violation of a Mitzvah from the Torah. Remember there is clear disagreement between Sages as to what some Mitzvot include. One does not rebuke another for following a different authority in Jewish law. So if a person does not hear the Shofar on Rosh Hashana one can “remind” that person that it is a Mitzvah to hear the Shofar. One should not, however, rebuke someone who is listening to the Shofar on Rosh Hashana, because he heard the Shofar in a synagogue where the one rebuking would not pray. Similarly one can rebuke someone who is eating forbidden meat, but not one who is eating food supervised by a Kashrut authority that the one who is rebuking does not accept.
There are authorities today, who feel that the whole rebuking process seems to be a very self-righteous way to act. There are many sinners today and rather than rebuke them, they should be treated as if they are someone who never had the chance to study and practice Jewish law. In other words, they are not sinners, just not fully aware of the complexities of Jewish law. Finally, no matter if one meets all the restrictions above and feels that, in this case, rebuke may help lift a person to live a better life, than rebuke may be given but always beware to give rebuke respectfully, honestly, sincerely and with great kindness. It should be a learning experience for the sinner and not ever be a source of embarrassment or shame. To shame a fellow human being is as close to committing murder as one can get without actually spilling blood. When we rebuke, we must carefully weigh and watch our words.
3-5768: Mitzvah 72
October 22, 2007
Mitzvah 72 – It is a positive commandment to upbraid a sinner
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “you shall surely rebuke your fellow.” (Lev. 19:17). He is to inform him that he does himself a wrong by his evil acts; and he is to inform him that he is telling hi this only for his own benefit, to bring him to life in the world-to-come. It is his duty to reprimand him until he listens to him, or until he strikes him and says “I will not listen to you.” There are some early authorities who are lenient about this, holding that it is enough until there is an angry retort [that the other gives us in rejecting our efforts]. But even the first view applies specifically when the person violates a prohibition by Torah law, and when he estimates that it will be effective for the future, that the other person will not do this thing again. Even a person of lower stature is duty-bound to rebuke a person of higher stature. Whoever has it in his power to oppose a sinner in his act and does not do so, fall victim to the guilt of is sin. Now, even though it is a religious duty to rebuke him [a sinner], he should not shame him first. It is a religious requirement to accept rebuke and to bear the chastiser affection. We find in the teachings of the Sages “that even if a person willfully violates a prohibition enacted by the Sages, it is permissible to call him a transgressor. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
This is a very difficult Mitzvah to perform because it has so many problems that can become attached to it. Let me first deal with the mechanics of the Mitzvah and then try and explain the problems.
This Mitzvah, on the surface is very straightforward. If we find someone whom we see is engaged in a violation of a Torah commandment, we have the obligation (not choice) to rebuke the actions of the person sinning and to try and get that person to do the right thing and not sin. It is so easy to sin and think that everyone is doing the same. When someone rebukes a sinner, that sinner can no longer think that his actions do not really matter. The idea is not to make anyone mad, but to get that person to contemplate his or her actions and to get them to do what is right. Such a person should really thank the one rebuking for saving his portion in the world to come. Additionally, it is possible to do a Mitzvah by mistake, but one must have intention to perform a sin. Rebuking a sinner forces that person to either change his or her ways or to affirm that it is his or her intention to sin, and thus they can no longer plead ignorance or error for their actions.
The first problem we detect with this Mitzvah is the intentions of the one who is doing the Rebuke. The rules of rebuking demand first of all, that the rebuke will have some effect on the Sinner. If the correction will be ignored, reviled or cause anger, than it is better to keep quiet and not rebuke. All the more so if the sinner is known to react violently to rebuke and could injure the one rebuking. Second, the one rebuking should have no vested interest in the sinner either continuing to sin or in changing his ways. If there is a hint of self-interest in the rebuke, someone else should do the rebuking. We don’t build ourselves up by tearing someone else down.
Not every sin is worthy of a rebuke. While we don’t try to rank one Mitzvah as being more important over another, note that the Hafetz Hayyim limits to rebuke to a violation of a Mitzvah from the Torah. Remember there is clear disagreement between Sages as to what some Mitzvot include. One does not rebuke another for following a different authority in Jewish law. So if a person does not hear the Shofar on Rosh Hashana one can “remind” that person that it is a Mitzvah to hear the Shofar. One should not, however, rebuke someone who is listening to the Shofar on Rosh Hashana, because he heard the Shofar in a synagogue where the one rebuking would not pray. Similarly one can rebuke someone who is eating forbidden meat, but not one who is eating food supervised by a Kashrut authority that the one who is rebuking does not accept.
There are authorities today, who feel that the whole rebuking process seems to be a very self-righteous way to act. There are many sinners today and rather than rebuke them, they should be treated as if they are someone who never had the chance to study and practice Jewish law. In other words, they are not sinners, just not fully aware of the complexities of Jewish law. Finally, no matter if one meets all the restrictions above and feels that, in this case, rebuke may help lift a person to live a better life, than rebuke may be given but always beware to give rebuke respectfully, honestly, sincerely and with great kindness. It should be a learning experience for the sinner and not ever be a source of embarrassment or shame. To shame a fellow human being is as close to committing murder as one can get without actually spilling blood. When we rebuke, we must carefully weigh and watch our words.
Monday, October 15, 2007
2-5768: Mitzvah 71
Talmidav Shel Aharon
2-5768: Mitzvah 71
October 15, 2007
Mitzvah 71 – It is a positive commandment to load with one’s fellow man, to set a burden on a domestic animal or on the person.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “you shall surely help him lift them up.” (Deut. 22:4). If one left him and went his own way without helping him, he disobeyed a positive commandment. However, an elder for whom it is beneath his dignity is free of the duty. If, though, had it been his own he would have unloaded and loaded the burden, he is duty bound likewise with the burden of his fellow man. If he wishes to go beyond the strict letter of the law, he may unload or load it even if it is not in accord with his dignity; and may blessing come upon him.
If a person faced both the religious duty of unloading and the duty of loading, unloading takes priority because of the pain of the living creature. However, if the one needing his burden loaded was a person whom he disliked, and the other was a friend, it is a religious duty to help the disliked person first, so as to discipline his inclination. The disliked person mentioned here means someone whom he saw, when alone, committing a sing, whereupon he warned him but the other did not turn back. It is then a religious duty to hate him. Nevertheless he is to load and unload with him; for the other might delay on account of his items of monetary value and thus come into some danger. And it is proper to save him, since he does not believe I the main principles of our faith.
Loading is to be done specifically if the other pays him a fee for it; but for nothing there is no obligation to do loading. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
This Mitzvah is the flip side of the one from last week. There are two Mitzvot, one to help unload an animal that has fallen under its burden. That burden then needs to be reloaded, either in a different way so the animal can carry it, or onto another animal that may not have as much to carry or on the back of the owner.
Unloading always has priority since it also involves saving an animal from pain and suffering. Loading, however, is more about caring for our fellow human beings. Just like last week, an elder who does not want to sully his dignity does not have to help load the animal of another, but if he is traveling with aides, he can instruct them to help. If he also travels with animals and, from time to time has to reload them, then he must help others in need by the side of the road. If he has not reason to stop and stops anyway, this is acting above the letter of the law and such a man will be praised. People who are stuck on the side of the road are in grave danger of falling prey to robbers and vandals of all kind. To help them get back on their way is, in many cases, participating in saving a life.
There is also a special part of this Mitzvah that involves helping an enemy before a friend. Other sages note that when you stop to help an enemy load his animal, he may think that he has not judged you correctly and it is possible that the two of you may end the hard feelings between you. I have to pause here to comment on the Hafetz Hayim and his definition of an “enemy”. The definition he gives is one who sins in spite of being warned that such an action is prohibited. A person who spitefully sins is not the kind of person someone who loves G-d wants to be near. I am not sure that I would say that such a person should be “hated”. Many Sages insist that those who sin today are not acting out of spite for the law, rather they just don’t know any better. I also assume that this could be the only person the law would allow you to hate. Anger is permitted for a day or two, but we have a big Mitzvah to forgive those who offend us so that we do not hate them for long.
I am not sure what the rule is on being paid. I admit that this seems strange to me. I can only guess that since there were people who were paid to help load an animal that the owner of the load could try and bypass paying such people by doing it himself and when it fall apart anyway, expecting those who he meets on the road to retie the load for free. Thus if he is on the road, he still needs to pay those who help him load up the animal again.
2-5768: Mitzvah 71
October 15, 2007
Mitzvah 71 – It is a positive commandment to load with one’s fellow man, to set a burden on a domestic animal or on the person.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “you shall surely help him lift them up.” (Deut. 22:4). If one left him and went his own way without helping him, he disobeyed a positive commandment. However, an elder for whom it is beneath his dignity is free of the duty. If, though, had it been his own he would have unloaded and loaded the burden, he is duty bound likewise with the burden of his fellow man. If he wishes to go beyond the strict letter of the law, he may unload or load it even if it is not in accord with his dignity; and may blessing come upon him.
If a person faced both the religious duty of unloading and the duty of loading, unloading takes priority because of the pain of the living creature. However, if the one needing his burden loaded was a person whom he disliked, and the other was a friend, it is a religious duty to help the disliked person first, so as to discipline his inclination. The disliked person mentioned here means someone whom he saw, when alone, committing a sing, whereupon he warned him but the other did not turn back. It is then a religious duty to hate him. Nevertheless he is to load and unload with him; for the other might delay on account of his items of monetary value and thus come into some danger. And it is proper to save him, since he does not believe I the main principles of our faith.
Loading is to be done specifically if the other pays him a fee for it; but for nothing there is no obligation to do loading. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
This Mitzvah is the flip side of the one from last week. There are two Mitzvot, one to help unload an animal that has fallen under its burden. That burden then needs to be reloaded, either in a different way so the animal can carry it, or onto another animal that may not have as much to carry or on the back of the owner.
Unloading always has priority since it also involves saving an animal from pain and suffering. Loading, however, is more about caring for our fellow human beings. Just like last week, an elder who does not want to sully his dignity does not have to help load the animal of another, but if he is traveling with aides, he can instruct them to help. If he also travels with animals and, from time to time has to reload them, then he must help others in need by the side of the road. If he has not reason to stop and stops anyway, this is acting above the letter of the law and such a man will be praised. People who are stuck on the side of the road are in grave danger of falling prey to robbers and vandals of all kind. To help them get back on their way is, in many cases, participating in saving a life.
There is also a special part of this Mitzvah that involves helping an enemy before a friend. Other sages note that when you stop to help an enemy load his animal, he may think that he has not judged you correctly and it is possible that the two of you may end the hard feelings between you. I have to pause here to comment on the Hafetz Hayim and his definition of an “enemy”. The definition he gives is one who sins in spite of being warned that such an action is prohibited. A person who spitefully sins is not the kind of person someone who loves G-d wants to be near. I am not sure that I would say that such a person should be “hated”. Many Sages insist that those who sin today are not acting out of spite for the law, rather they just don’t know any better. I also assume that this could be the only person the law would allow you to hate. Anger is permitted for a day or two, but we have a big Mitzvah to forgive those who offend us so that we do not hate them for long.
I am not sure what the rule is on being paid. I admit that this seems strange to me. I can only guess that since there were people who were paid to help load an animal that the owner of the load could try and bypass paying such people by doing it himself and when it fall apart anyway, expecting those who he meets on the road to retie the load for free. Thus if he is on the road, he still needs to pay those who help him load up the animal again.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
1-5768: Mitzvah 70
Talmidav Shel Aharon
1-5768: Mitzvah 70
August 20, 2007
I am beginning now another year of my online study. What began as a lesson mailed to a few friends, is now a permanent blog with archives of all the previous lessons. I thank all of you who have taken the time to read and comment on my teachings for joining me in this study of Judaism and Jewish Law. May G-d bless our efforts in the New Year.
Mitzvah 70 – It is a positive commandment to unload fro the domestic animal of one’s fellow-human being that is lying under its burden.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “if you see the donkey of one that you hate lying under its burden …you shall surely help with him.” (Exodus. 23:5). – even if there was on it a larger load that was fit for it. It is one’s duty to unload it for nothing, without payment. However, an elder for whom it is beneath his dignity is free of the obligation. If one unloaded and reloaded [the animal] and it fell down again, he is duty-bound to unload and load it back on yet another time, and even a hundred times, as Scripture says, “you shall surely help with him”. And he as to walk with him as far as a parasang {to make sure all is now in order] unless the owner of the load says, “I do not need you.” It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
There are two different reasons for this Mitzvah. The first is an issue of Tzar Baalai Hayyim, or Kindness to Animals. Since animals were the main beasts of burden, (esp. donkeys) it is possible to load them up with more stuff than they are able to carry. If the animal can’t carry the load, it will collapse under the weight or just refuse to carry it. At the beginning or end of the journey, there will be helpers to load and unload the animal, but on the road, only the owner of the load or the owner of the animal (it could be the same person) is present and reloading the animal requires more than two hands. It is in the animal interest to have the load redistributed so that it is easier to carry or that some of the load be transferred to a stronger animal. The animal can’t talk to us, so it is a matter of trial and error, but we need to keep up the process until the animal can carry the load placed on its back.
The other reason for the mitzvah has to do with caring about our fellow human beings. We can’t just ignore a person in need. Even if that person is an enemy or one that we hate, we must stop and lend a hand. Perhaps it will lead to reconciliation, but even if it does not, we still have the responsibility to help. It is certain that if we do not help but just walk on by, we will not be making any new friends, and our enemies will hate us even more. We are not to ask for any pay for helping a person in distress. There are some who say that this therefore would apply to seeing a person who has a broken down car by the side of the road. We cannot just drive by, but must help change the tire or do what we can to help the person get back on the road. We become the roadside assistant that the other person needs. There is a danger her. It is well known that there are some nefarious people who use a broken down car to lure unsuspecting drivers to stop and be robbed or worse. But in the middle of the day in the middle of the city, others may drive by but we should at least stop and offer to call for help, as long as we don’t endanger ourselves.
The Hafetz Hayyim also notes that an elderly person or someone infirm or unable to help, does not need to stop and help with a job that is clearly beyond his or her capacities. We should stop and do what we can, even if it means only getting someone else to come and help.
A Parasang is a “Persian Mile” it equals 8,000 cubits or about 2.4 miles or 3.84 km.
1-5768: Mitzvah 70
August 20, 2007
I am beginning now another year of my online study. What began as a lesson mailed to a few friends, is now a permanent blog with archives of all the previous lessons. I thank all of you who have taken the time to read and comment on my teachings for joining me in this study of Judaism and Jewish Law. May G-d bless our efforts in the New Year.
Mitzvah 70 – It is a positive commandment to unload fro the domestic animal of one’s fellow-human being that is lying under its burden.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “if you see the donkey of one that you hate lying under its burden …you shall surely help with him.” (Exodus. 23:5). – even if there was on it a larger load that was fit for it. It is one’s duty to unload it for nothing, without payment. However, an elder for whom it is beneath his dignity is free of the obligation. If one unloaded and reloaded [the animal] and it fell down again, he is duty-bound to unload and load it back on yet another time, and even a hundred times, as Scripture says, “you shall surely help with him”. And he as to walk with him as far as a parasang {to make sure all is now in order] unless the owner of the load says, “I do not need you.” It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
There are two different reasons for this Mitzvah. The first is an issue of Tzar Baalai Hayyim, or Kindness to Animals. Since animals were the main beasts of burden, (esp. donkeys) it is possible to load them up with more stuff than they are able to carry. If the animal can’t carry the load, it will collapse under the weight or just refuse to carry it. At the beginning or end of the journey, there will be helpers to load and unload the animal, but on the road, only the owner of the load or the owner of the animal (it could be the same person) is present and reloading the animal requires more than two hands. It is in the animal interest to have the load redistributed so that it is easier to carry or that some of the load be transferred to a stronger animal. The animal can’t talk to us, so it is a matter of trial and error, but we need to keep up the process until the animal can carry the load placed on its back.
The other reason for the mitzvah has to do with caring about our fellow human beings. We can’t just ignore a person in need. Even if that person is an enemy or one that we hate, we must stop and lend a hand. Perhaps it will lead to reconciliation, but even if it does not, we still have the responsibility to help. It is certain that if we do not help but just walk on by, we will not be making any new friends, and our enemies will hate us even more. We are not to ask for any pay for helping a person in distress. There are some who say that this therefore would apply to seeing a person who has a broken down car by the side of the road. We cannot just drive by, but must help change the tire or do what we can to help the person get back on the road. We become the roadside assistant that the other person needs. There is a danger her. It is well known that there are some nefarious people who use a broken down car to lure unsuspecting drivers to stop and be robbed or worse. But in the middle of the day in the middle of the city, others may drive by but we should at least stop and offer to call for help, as long as we don’t endanger ourselves.
The Hafetz Hayyim also notes that an elderly person or someone infirm or unable to help, does not need to stop and help with a job that is clearly beyond his or her capacities. We should stop and do what we can, even if it means only getting someone else to come and help.
A Parasang is a “Persian Mile” it equals 8,000 cubits or about 2.4 miles or 3.84 km.
Monday, August 20, 2007
35-5767: Mitzvah 69
Talmidav Shel Aharon
35-5767: Mitzvah 69
August 20, 2007
Mitzvah 69 – It is a positive commandment to return something lost to a member of Jewry
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “you shall surely bring them back to your brother” (Deut. 22:1). If one turned a blind eye to it, he disobeyed a positive commandment and violated a negative one. If he took the lost object and did not return it, he also disobeyed this positive commandment and violated two prohibitions. It is a religious duty to return a lost object even to a wicked person. But if someone eats non-Kosher meat out of spite and defiance, or he violates the Sabbath openly, he is a heretic, and it is forbidden to return a lost object to him. If a person finds something with which it would be beneath his dignity to bother, and were it his own he would not trouble himself with it, he has no duty to bother with this. If, however, he wishes to act beyond the strict line or letter of the law, he may do so, and may blessing come upon him. Now, Rabbenu Yona wrote: If it is a religious duty to devote effort to rescue another person’s items of monetary value, how much more certainly must we expend effort to rescue him himself, to do something to save him in his time of distress. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
In Judaism, one is not allowed to say, “I don’t want to get involved.” We have duties to G-d and we have duties to ourselves and we also have duties to our society. This is one of them. A lost object may be of little interest to me, but I can not just ignore it and walk on by. I have an obligation by this commandment to protect that which was lost and make a proper attempt to locate the owner. If the object is properly labeled with the name of the owner, I have to search out and find the owner and return his object in as good a condition as I found it. I can not allow it to become any more damaged than it already may be and, if I keep the object for any real length of time, and I am fixing my own similar objects, I should fix the lost property as well.
If the object found has no name on it, but it does have marks by which it can be identified, than we must publicize the finding of the object and ask those who would claim it as their own, to describe the identifying marks. For example, if jewelry were found, all that needs to be done is to announce that “a bracelet” was found and those who come to claim it can describe it in order to identify it.
If the object has no name on it or marks that could identify it, than I do not have the obligation to seek the owner. It is assumed that the owner has written it off as lost, and therefore it should be considered ownerless and the finder can keep it. For example, cash that is lost but not in a wallet or identifiable purse, that has no unusual marks on the bill, could not be returned because all money looks alike and there is no way to identify the true owner.
If the object is not worth saving, that is, it is so inconsequential that there is just no point in returning it, than we do not need to return it. If you find an old pair of beach shoes in the sand, and they could be identified but clearly the person who left them would not come back to find them, they could simply buy themselves a new pair, then we have no obligation for returning the object at all. If the owner did come and ask about it, it would probably be more charitable to buy him or her a new pair of shoes.
If I find an object that should be returned, and I don’t try to find the owner, I am in violation of this law and the law that insists that we don’t ignore the property of our neighbor. If I take the object and don’t seek the owner, I violate those laws and the law of robbery as well. I have kept something that does not belong to me.
The owner of the object does not matter. If we know who it belongs to, we have to return it, even if that person is our enemy, or if that person is wicked. As for the heretic, since he as separated himself from the community, he does not get the benefits of being a part of the community. The issue of eating treif meat or violating Shabbat should not be taken literally since these are very subjective Mitzvot. You may not keep my level of Kashrut or do what I do on Shabbat but that does not make one a heretic. If one denies G-d, than such a person is outside the community. As a Conservative Jew, I am not so sure that I would be so quick to brand someone a heretic or not to return an object that was once owned by a non-Jew. In all cases, retuning lost property is a great Mitzvah and even if we don’t have the obligation to return it, if we do so, we are praised for going above the letter of the law. At the end, we are reminded that if it is so important that we return lost property to a person, how much more important it must be if we save a person from distress, danger and trouble. We just cannot sit by and let someone else save the person. The only restriction on this is if saving someone else would endanger out lives. We are not obligated to save anyone or anything if, by saving him, her or it, we would be endangering our lives.
35-5767: Mitzvah 69
August 20, 2007
Mitzvah 69 – It is a positive commandment to return something lost to a member of Jewry
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “you shall surely bring them back to your brother” (Deut. 22:1). If one turned a blind eye to it, he disobeyed a positive commandment and violated a negative one. If he took the lost object and did not return it, he also disobeyed this positive commandment and violated two prohibitions. It is a religious duty to return a lost object even to a wicked person. But if someone eats non-Kosher meat out of spite and defiance, or he violates the Sabbath openly, he is a heretic, and it is forbidden to return a lost object to him. If a person finds something with which it would be beneath his dignity to bother, and were it his own he would not trouble himself with it, he has no duty to bother with this. If, however, he wishes to act beyond the strict line or letter of the law, he may do so, and may blessing come upon him. Now, Rabbenu Yona wrote: If it is a religious duty to devote effort to rescue another person’s items of monetary value, how much more certainly must we expend effort to rescue him himself, to do something to save him in his time of distress. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
In Judaism, one is not allowed to say, “I don’t want to get involved.” We have duties to G-d and we have duties to ourselves and we also have duties to our society. This is one of them. A lost object may be of little interest to me, but I can not just ignore it and walk on by. I have an obligation by this commandment to protect that which was lost and make a proper attempt to locate the owner. If the object is properly labeled with the name of the owner, I have to search out and find the owner and return his object in as good a condition as I found it. I can not allow it to become any more damaged than it already may be and, if I keep the object for any real length of time, and I am fixing my own similar objects, I should fix the lost property as well.
If the object found has no name on it, but it does have marks by which it can be identified, than we must publicize the finding of the object and ask those who would claim it as their own, to describe the identifying marks. For example, if jewelry were found, all that needs to be done is to announce that “a bracelet” was found and those who come to claim it can describe it in order to identify it.
If the object has no name on it or marks that could identify it, than I do not have the obligation to seek the owner. It is assumed that the owner has written it off as lost, and therefore it should be considered ownerless and the finder can keep it. For example, cash that is lost but not in a wallet or identifiable purse, that has no unusual marks on the bill, could not be returned because all money looks alike and there is no way to identify the true owner.
If the object is not worth saving, that is, it is so inconsequential that there is just no point in returning it, than we do not need to return it. If you find an old pair of beach shoes in the sand, and they could be identified but clearly the person who left them would not come back to find them, they could simply buy themselves a new pair, then we have no obligation for returning the object at all. If the owner did come and ask about it, it would probably be more charitable to buy him or her a new pair of shoes.
If I find an object that should be returned, and I don’t try to find the owner, I am in violation of this law and the law that insists that we don’t ignore the property of our neighbor. If I take the object and don’t seek the owner, I violate those laws and the law of robbery as well. I have kept something that does not belong to me.
The owner of the object does not matter. If we know who it belongs to, we have to return it, even if that person is our enemy, or if that person is wicked. As for the heretic, since he as separated himself from the community, he does not get the benefits of being a part of the community. The issue of eating treif meat or violating Shabbat should not be taken literally since these are very subjective Mitzvot. You may not keep my level of Kashrut or do what I do on Shabbat but that does not make one a heretic. If one denies G-d, than such a person is outside the community. As a Conservative Jew, I am not so sure that I would be so quick to brand someone a heretic or not to return an object that was once owned by a non-Jew. In all cases, retuning lost property is a great Mitzvah and even if we don’t have the obligation to return it, if we do so, we are praised for going above the letter of the law. At the end, we are reminded that if it is so important that we return lost property to a person, how much more important it must be if we save a person from distress, danger and trouble. We just cannot sit by and let someone else save the person. The only restriction on this is if saving someone else would endanger out lives. We are not obligated to save anyone or anything if, by saving him, her or it, we would be endangering our lives.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
34-5767: Mitzvah 68
Talmidav Shel Aharon
34-5767: Mitzvah 68
August 14, 2007
Mitzvah 68 – It is a positive commandment to return whatever one has taken in robbery.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “he shall restore what he took by robbery” (Lev.5:23). If a person seized by robbery something worth a perutah or more, he is to return it to the robbed person. If the robbed man has died, he is to return the seized object to the heirs. If the seized object is lost, he is to give its value in money. Included in this commandment there is also the duty of returning anything gained by theft or swindle. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
First of all, the definition of perutah is the smallest coin in the world of the ancient rabbis. Not only was it the smallest denomination of coin, but, as usual for the ancient world, it was also physically a small coin. The value of a coin was determined by the amount of the metal from which it was made. So larger coins were worth more than smaller ones.
Robbery is a crime. It is mentioned in the Bible and the penalty is, in some cases a fine of double the value of the stolen object if it is a moveable object. If it is cattle, the fine could increase to four or five times the value of the animal. No matter what the fine, the object that was stolen has to be returned to its owner. So, to be clear, robbery is not a mitzvah, but returning the seized object is. If the object is lost, than the value of the object is returned. And if the owner has died, it is to be returned to his heirs.
Finally, this law applies to all goods obtained illegally. If the object is not taken in an armed robbery but shoplifted, swiped, or gained by sleight of hand or by confusing the owner, than it still must be returned.
The point of all this is to insure that the person who stole the object could not benefit from his robbery. For example, if someone was the owner of a precious object and another offered him a fair price to buy it, but the owner declares that it is not for sale at any price since it has sentimental value. The buyer cannot steal it from the owner, and then pay the fine and keep the object. The object must also be returned. There is no difference if the object is valuable or not, one must return stolen goods.
This applies only to things that are moveable property. Real Estate that is stolen is a different category and the penalties are much higher since stealing property requires more effort. One must either move a boundary stone or pay witnesses to create a false bill of sale. Either way, it is a crime, in the bible against both human beings and G-d and a different set of laws applies.
This is a law designed to insure that “Crime does not pay”
34-5767: Mitzvah 68
August 14, 2007
Mitzvah 68 – It is a positive commandment to return whatever one has taken in robbery.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says, “he shall restore what he took by robbery” (Lev.5:23). If a person seized by robbery something worth a perutah or more, he is to return it to the robbed person. If the robbed man has died, he is to return the seized object to the heirs. If the seized object is lost, he is to give its value in money. Included in this commandment there is also the duty of returning anything gained by theft or swindle. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
First of all, the definition of perutah is the smallest coin in the world of the ancient rabbis. Not only was it the smallest denomination of coin, but, as usual for the ancient world, it was also physically a small coin. The value of a coin was determined by the amount of the metal from which it was made. So larger coins were worth more than smaller ones.
Robbery is a crime. It is mentioned in the Bible and the penalty is, in some cases a fine of double the value of the stolen object if it is a moveable object. If it is cattle, the fine could increase to four or five times the value of the animal. No matter what the fine, the object that was stolen has to be returned to its owner. So, to be clear, robbery is not a mitzvah, but returning the seized object is. If the object is lost, than the value of the object is returned. And if the owner has died, it is to be returned to his heirs.
Finally, this law applies to all goods obtained illegally. If the object is not taken in an armed robbery but shoplifted, swiped, or gained by sleight of hand or by confusing the owner, than it still must be returned.
The point of all this is to insure that the person who stole the object could not benefit from his robbery. For example, if someone was the owner of a precious object and another offered him a fair price to buy it, but the owner declares that it is not for sale at any price since it has sentimental value. The buyer cannot steal it from the owner, and then pay the fine and keep the object. The object must also be returned. There is no difference if the object is valuable or not, one must return stolen goods.
This applies only to things that are moveable property. Real Estate that is stolen is a different category and the penalties are much higher since stealing property requires more effort. One must either move a boundary stone or pay witnesses to create a false bill of sale. Either way, it is a crime, in the bible against both human beings and G-d and a different set of laws applies.
This is a law designed to insure that “Crime does not pay”
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
33-5767: Mitzvah 67
Talmidav Shel Aharon
33-5767: Mitzvah 67
July 30, 2007
Mitzvah 67 – It is a positive commandment to render judgement on matters of buying and selling.
Hafetz Hayim: By the rule that the Torah ordained about it. This is to say that there are situations where a transaction between seller and buyer remains valid, and situations where it has no validity; and an obligation lies upon us to judge between them according to the instruction of the Torah. A specific commandment is given about this in a specific portion [of Scripture]: “and if you sell something to your fellow or buy from your fellow’s hand, etc. (Lev. 25:14) – because it [trade] is a constant thing among human beings, without which it is impossible for people to live even one day. Land can be acquired as one’s possession through money, a document, or demonstration of ownership; and moveable goods or a domestic animal by drawing {it to oneself] and all the more certainly by lifting it, and so forth. It applies everywhere and in every time.
This one surprised me for a couple of reasons. It is the first we have encountered that does not have a “proof text” from the Bible and the text that it does quote only makes the point of this Mitzvah more confused. Is this a Mitzvah only for judges, or for appraisers or does it apply to everyone, (note the conclusion does not include people).
Let me start with the quote from Leviticus 25:14. I need to give you the rest of the quote because, for some reason, the Hafetz Hayim does not quote the entire verse let alone the section in which it sits. Let me quote the section:
“When you sell property to your neighbor, or buy any from your neighbor, you shall not wrong one another. In buying from your neighbor, you shall deduct only for the number of years since the jubilee; and in selling to you, he shall charge you only for the remaining crop years; the more years, the higher the price; for what he is selling you is a number of harvests. Do no wrong one another, but fear your G-d; for I am the Lord your G-d.”
This is from Parshat Behar and speaks of the Jubilee year when land returned to its original owner. In a technical sense, the land was never sold, but leased for the number of years until it had to be returned. We see, in this case, there has to be a determination as to how many years are left until the land must be returned. Since we are talking about crop years, with the assumption that farming is the purpose of buying (leasing) the land, the number of years will depend on which crop is being planted and what time of year the sale takes place. This would mean that the Hafetz Hayim would be referring to land and the jubilee year only, and clearly he is not.
Perhaps since he is talking about buying and selling, he expands the mitzvah to include moveable property as well as cattle. The laws concerning buying and selling are very long and complicated and I have only a modest understanding of them. Part of the reason for this is because, under Jewish Law, when there is a conflict between Jewish law and civil law, in the case of monetary laws, we follow the law of the land and not Jewish law.
It seems more likely that the Hafetz Hayim is referring to all the laws of transactions here. The mitzvah is to make sure that all transactions are performed properly. In the case of land, to have a valid transaction you have to hand money for the land over to the seller in front of two or more witnesses, or you can draw up a contract, and by taking possession of the contract in front of witnesses, or a demonstration of ownership, that means putting up a fence, hoeing, locking the premises or putting down a mattress to sleep or any other act that would show that this person is the owner. (I note here that since a Ketubah, a marriage contract, transfers ownership of part of the grooms land to the wife in the event that he should predecease her, that the rules of transaction by contract, that is the need for witnesses and the placing of the Ketubah in her hands, is necessary and therefore a part of the wedding ceremony)
In the case of moveable property or animals, the actual object has to moved into the domain of the buyer. It can be carried there, or, in the case of animals, “pulled” there. If it is not practical to move the object, the buyer, lifting it from its place, can acquire it. There are other technical ways to acquire objects, such as using a handkerchief, or in some cases, the transfer of money. What I think the Mitzvah here is to be one of the witnesses to the transaction and therefore enable business to go on as usual. Without witnesses, business would grind to a halt and everyone would suffer.
This could explain why the Mitzvah is so unusual. While we are “commanded” to do this, it could involve a great deal of inconvenience. Rabbis would want to insure that commerce goes on but the requirement part of this seems to be very tenuous.
I invite any of my readers who have a deeper understanding of the laws of acquisition in Judaism to attach their comments if it would help clarify this Mitzvah.
33-5767: Mitzvah 67
July 30, 2007
Mitzvah 67 – It is a positive commandment to render judgement on matters of buying and selling.
Hafetz Hayim: By the rule that the Torah ordained about it. This is to say that there are situations where a transaction between seller and buyer remains valid, and situations where it has no validity; and an obligation lies upon us to judge between them according to the instruction of the Torah. A specific commandment is given about this in a specific portion [of Scripture]: “and if you sell something to your fellow or buy from your fellow’s hand, etc. (Lev. 25:14) – because it [trade] is a constant thing among human beings, without which it is impossible for people to live even one day. Land can be acquired as one’s possession through money, a document, or demonstration of ownership; and moveable goods or a domestic animal by drawing {it to oneself] and all the more certainly by lifting it, and so forth. It applies everywhere and in every time.
This one surprised me for a couple of reasons. It is the first we have encountered that does not have a “proof text” from the Bible and the text that it does quote only makes the point of this Mitzvah more confused. Is this a Mitzvah only for judges, or for appraisers or does it apply to everyone, (note the conclusion does not include people).
Let me start with the quote from Leviticus 25:14. I need to give you the rest of the quote because, for some reason, the Hafetz Hayim does not quote the entire verse let alone the section in which it sits. Let me quote the section:
“When you sell property to your neighbor, or buy any from your neighbor, you shall not wrong one another. In buying from your neighbor, you shall deduct only for the number of years since the jubilee; and in selling to you, he shall charge you only for the remaining crop years; the more years, the higher the price; for what he is selling you is a number of harvests. Do no wrong one another, but fear your G-d; for I am the Lord your G-d.”
This is from Parshat Behar and speaks of the Jubilee year when land returned to its original owner. In a technical sense, the land was never sold, but leased for the number of years until it had to be returned. We see, in this case, there has to be a determination as to how many years are left until the land must be returned. Since we are talking about crop years, with the assumption that farming is the purpose of buying (leasing) the land, the number of years will depend on which crop is being planted and what time of year the sale takes place. This would mean that the Hafetz Hayim would be referring to land and the jubilee year only, and clearly he is not.
Perhaps since he is talking about buying and selling, he expands the mitzvah to include moveable property as well as cattle. The laws concerning buying and selling are very long and complicated and I have only a modest understanding of them. Part of the reason for this is because, under Jewish Law, when there is a conflict between Jewish law and civil law, in the case of monetary laws, we follow the law of the land and not Jewish law.
It seems more likely that the Hafetz Hayim is referring to all the laws of transactions here. The mitzvah is to make sure that all transactions are performed properly. In the case of land, to have a valid transaction you have to hand money for the land over to the seller in front of two or more witnesses, or you can draw up a contract, and by taking possession of the contract in front of witnesses, or a demonstration of ownership, that means putting up a fence, hoeing, locking the premises or putting down a mattress to sleep or any other act that would show that this person is the owner. (I note here that since a Ketubah, a marriage contract, transfers ownership of part of the grooms land to the wife in the event that he should predecease her, that the rules of transaction by contract, that is the need for witnesses and the placing of the Ketubah in her hands, is necessary and therefore a part of the wedding ceremony)
In the case of moveable property or animals, the actual object has to moved into the domain of the buyer. It can be carried there, or, in the case of animals, “pulled” there. If it is not practical to move the object, the buyer, lifting it from its place, can acquire it. There are other technical ways to acquire objects, such as using a handkerchief, or in some cases, the transfer of money. What I think the Mitzvah here is to be one of the witnesses to the transaction and therefore enable business to go on as usual. Without witnesses, business would grind to a halt and everyone would suffer.
This could explain why the Mitzvah is so unusual. While we are “commanded” to do this, it could involve a great deal of inconvenience. Rabbis would want to insure that commerce goes on but the requirement part of this seems to be very tenuous.
I invite any of my readers who have a deeper understanding of the laws of acquisition in Judaism to attach their comments if it would help clarify this Mitzvah.
Monday, July 16, 2007
32-5767: Mitzvah 66
Talmidav Shel Aharon
32-5767: Mitzvah 66
July 16, 2007
Mitzvah 66 – It is a positive commandment to give the wages of a hired hand on the same day.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “On his day you shall give him his hire” (Deut. 24:15) To a “resident stranger” ( who has committed himself to observe the seven commandments of Noah) this law also applies, that “on his day you shall give him his hire.” It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
I believe that this law is the source of the maxim: An honest days pay for an honest days work. That is the fundamental ethic behind this Mitzvah. If someone does work for you, they are entitled to be paid. The Mitzvah also insists that the payment should be given on the same day the work is done.
The importance of this law seems obvious. A day laborer depends on his pay to support himself and his family. To withhold that pay, or to make him or her wait to be paid, would cause needless suffering. It would also leave the laborer with little recourse to get his money later. Such day laborers do not have the resources to sue the employer for their wages. By the time the matter gets to court, the entire family could be starving. These workers are some of the most vulnerable in society. They are at the bottom of the labor hierarchy; The Sages passed many laws to protect them. One was last weeks Mitzvah, that they be given opportunities to snack on the job. This one adds the protection that they will be paid promptly.
I apply this mitzvah to all small business owners who go out and try to offer a service to the community. The gardeners, the pool technicians, the handyman and the roof repairman are all basically in business for themselves and depend on being paid promptly. If they accept a credit card, the bill is paid on the spot. If they are used to sending a monthly bill, I direct the bill pay at my bank to pay them as soon as the bill arrives and not wait 30 days to send payment. Large corporations, the power company, the mortgage company, the city water bureau, and the credit card companies I pay just prior to the due date, but not the “little guys.” The Torah teaches us that they deserve a break and should be paid, if possible, the same day. The Talmud records a dispute between such laborers and a wealthy landowner. He withheld payment and seized the workers garments because they were moving barrels of wine and broke one, causing him a loss. The workers took the man to court and the court insisted that their garments be returned, since they did not intend to break the barrel, it was just an accident and they could not be held liable for accidental damages. The court also demanded that they be paid for the day. The landowner was incensed that they had caused him damage and now he hand to pay them too! Still the court insisted that they had done their best that day and deserved to be paid.
32-5767: Mitzvah 66
July 16, 2007
Mitzvah 66 – It is a positive commandment to give the wages of a hired hand on the same day.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “On his day you shall give him his hire” (Deut. 24:15) To a “resident stranger” ( who has committed himself to observe the seven commandments of Noah) this law also applies, that “on his day you shall give him his hire.” It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
I believe that this law is the source of the maxim: An honest days pay for an honest days work. That is the fundamental ethic behind this Mitzvah. If someone does work for you, they are entitled to be paid. The Mitzvah also insists that the payment should be given on the same day the work is done.
The importance of this law seems obvious. A day laborer depends on his pay to support himself and his family. To withhold that pay, or to make him or her wait to be paid, would cause needless suffering. It would also leave the laborer with little recourse to get his money later. Such day laborers do not have the resources to sue the employer for their wages. By the time the matter gets to court, the entire family could be starving. These workers are some of the most vulnerable in society. They are at the bottom of the labor hierarchy; The Sages passed many laws to protect them. One was last weeks Mitzvah, that they be given opportunities to snack on the job. This one adds the protection that they will be paid promptly.
I apply this mitzvah to all small business owners who go out and try to offer a service to the community. The gardeners, the pool technicians, the handyman and the roof repairman are all basically in business for themselves and depend on being paid promptly. If they accept a credit card, the bill is paid on the spot. If they are used to sending a monthly bill, I direct the bill pay at my bank to pay them as soon as the bill arrives and not wait 30 days to send payment. Large corporations, the power company, the mortgage company, the city water bureau, and the credit card companies I pay just prior to the due date, but not the “little guys.” The Torah teaches us that they deserve a break and should be paid, if possible, the same day. The Talmud records a dispute between such laborers and a wealthy landowner. He withheld payment and seized the workers garments because they were moving barrels of wine and broke one, causing him a loss. The workers took the man to court and the court insisted that their garments be returned, since they did not intend to break the barrel, it was just an accident and they could not be held liable for accidental damages. The court also demanded that they be paid for the day. The landowner was incensed that they had caused him damage and now he hand to pay them too! Still the court insisted that they had done their best that day and deserved to be paid.
Monday, July 9, 2007
31-5767: Mitzvah 65
Talmidav Shel Aharon
31-5767: Mitzvah 65
July 9, 2007
Mitzvah 65 – It is a positive commandment that an owner should allow the laborer to eat of what he is working at, when it is something that grows from the ground.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “When you come into your fellow’s vineyard, then you may eat etc.” (Deut. 23:25) and it says, “When you come into your fellow’s standing grain, you may pluck the ears etc.” (Deut. 23:26) and by the Oral Tradition it was learned that Scripture speaks here of a laborer.
He may eat produce that either was plucked or is attached, whose work has not been completed yet, and by this act [of his labor] the work is completed. This means then, not before the completion of the work nor after the completion of the work, but only during the completion of the work. And for the purpose of returning a lost working time, to the owner, the Sages taught “that the workers should eat while walking from one furrow to another, and while returning from the winepress [even though they are not actually working then] so that they should not stop their work and sit down to eat, walking, and thus not be idle from their work.
If someone is guarding produce attached to the soil, he is not to eat of it at all since a watchman is not like one doing actual labor. If a person is guarding reaped produce he may eat of it not by the laws of the Torah, but by the norms of the land. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
We sometimes get so used to the Sages talking about moral laws and often neglect laws like these, which are basic labor laws. These laws are designed to help understand the relationship between labor and management. While we can also understand them as moral laws, they are really part of a genre of laws that relate to proper business practices.
What we have here is a basic law of management/labor where it spells out one of the rights that the laborers have when working in the field. Jewish law forbids a man to muzzle his ox when threshing grain to prevent the animal from eating the grain on the threshing floor. This was seen as preventing animal cruelty. If we feel that way about animals, how much more should we allow the laborer to eat of the produce he or she is harvesting!
The parameters of the law are identified here. If the reaping has not begun and the laborers are just repairing fences, then they cannot touch the grain or fruit. If the harvest is over and the grain or fruit is waiting to be tithed or other taxes need to be paid, the laborer cannot touch it. If the laborer is hired to be a watchman for produce still in the field, he is not allowed to eat from it since he is supposed to be guarding it. Normally this would apply to produce already reaped, but local custom says he is entitled to snack on what he is guarding.
Workers in the field, however, who are in the process of reaping the produce can eat from what they are harvesting. The only issue is if they spend all their time eating and not enough time actually working! The law states that when they move from field to field, or from one row to another, or when they are dropping off the grain or grapes at the barn or the winepress, they can eat while they are walking. This is not in lieu of a lunch break, for laborers were required to bring their own lunch and could sit for a while and eat it. This is just a snack during the day and they are supposed to keep working while they are “snacking”. To do otherwise would be stealing time from the owner of the field. I suspect that this walking rule also prevented the workers from eating too much of the produce they were harvesting.
Thus both the landowner and the laborer understood their responsibilities during the harvest and the work got done, and the laborer was treated with respect. It is not too bad a system. We will see more about worker rights in our next lesson.
31-5767: Mitzvah 65
July 9, 2007
Mitzvah 65 – It is a positive commandment that an owner should allow the laborer to eat of what he is working at, when it is something that grows from the ground.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “When you come into your fellow’s vineyard, then you may eat etc.” (Deut. 23:25) and it says, “When you come into your fellow’s standing grain, you may pluck the ears etc.” (Deut. 23:26) and by the Oral Tradition it was learned that Scripture speaks here of a laborer.
He may eat produce that either was plucked or is attached, whose work has not been completed yet, and by this act [of his labor] the work is completed. This means then, not before the completion of the work nor after the completion of the work, but only during the completion of the work. And for the purpose of returning a lost working time, to the owner, the Sages taught “that the workers should eat while walking from one furrow to another, and while returning from the winepress [even though they are not actually working then] so that they should not stop their work and sit down to eat, walking, and thus not be idle from their work.
If someone is guarding produce attached to the soil, he is not to eat of it at all since a watchman is not like one doing actual labor. If a person is guarding reaped produce he may eat of it not by the laws of the Torah, but by the norms of the land. It applies everywhere and in every time for both men and women.
We sometimes get so used to the Sages talking about moral laws and often neglect laws like these, which are basic labor laws. These laws are designed to help understand the relationship between labor and management. While we can also understand them as moral laws, they are really part of a genre of laws that relate to proper business practices.
What we have here is a basic law of management/labor where it spells out one of the rights that the laborers have when working in the field. Jewish law forbids a man to muzzle his ox when threshing grain to prevent the animal from eating the grain on the threshing floor. This was seen as preventing animal cruelty. If we feel that way about animals, how much more should we allow the laborer to eat of the produce he or she is harvesting!
The parameters of the law are identified here. If the reaping has not begun and the laborers are just repairing fences, then they cannot touch the grain or fruit. If the harvest is over and the grain or fruit is waiting to be tithed or other taxes need to be paid, the laborer cannot touch it. If the laborer is hired to be a watchman for produce still in the field, he is not allowed to eat from it since he is supposed to be guarding it. Normally this would apply to produce already reaped, but local custom says he is entitled to snack on what he is guarding.
Workers in the field, however, who are in the process of reaping the produce can eat from what they are harvesting. The only issue is if they spend all their time eating and not enough time actually working! The law states that when they move from field to field, or from one row to another, or when they are dropping off the grain or grapes at the barn or the winepress, they can eat while they are walking. This is not in lieu of a lunch break, for laborers were required to bring their own lunch and could sit for a while and eat it. This is just a snack during the day and they are supposed to keep working while they are “snacking”. To do otherwise would be stealing time from the owner of the field. I suspect that this walking rule also prevented the workers from eating too much of the produce they were harvesting.
Thus both the landowner and the laborer understood their responsibilities during the harvest and the work got done, and the laborer was treated with respect. It is not too bad a system. We will see more about worker rights in our next lesson.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
30-5767: Mitzvah 64
Talmidav Shel Aharon
30-5767: Mitzvah 64
July 2, 2007
Mitzvah 64 – It is a positive commandment to release (cancel) a loan in the year of Shmitta (release).
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “every creditor shall release what he has lent his fellow.” (Deut. 15:2) If a borrower repays a creditor a loan over which the seventh year (shemitta) has passed, he is not to take it from him but is rather to tell him, “I release it”: for Scripture says, “And this is the manner (lit. the spoken word) of the release” (ibid). If the borrower says, “Nevertheless, take it.” He may accept it from him.
By the law of the Torah, the release of money obligations is in effect only at the time that the law of the jubilee year is in effect. But it is a decree of the Sages that the release of money obligations should be in force also in the present time, so that the law of release should not be forgotten by Jewry. However, a prosbul (the declaration in court after a loan is given that the shmitta year is not to cancel it) is effective against the law of released money obligations at the present time, that this loan should not be cancelled. It applies to both men and women.
The Torah is specific that a debt should be cancelled in the seventh year, the shmitta year. There is no basis in the Torah for getting around this release. That is why if the borrower comes to the lender and offers to repay it after the shmitta has begun, the lender must declare out loud, that he has released the borrower from his obligations for the loan. Only if the borrower insists on repayment, can the lender accept it.
The reason for this law reflects the reality of an agricultural economy. Farmers need cash to raise crops. They can borrow against the profit they will receive from their crops in the spring and repay it after the harvest is sold. That should leave the farmer with enough to feed his family and to be able to plant again in the spring. Any farmer knows, however, that the situation is far more precarious that that. Sometimes the produce prices are depressed after the harvest and they do not get enough money to repay the loan. Sometimes there are natural or man-made disasters that destroy the crops and leave the farmer with no way to repay the loan. A couple of bad growing seasons and the burden of debt can be so crushing that the farm will have to be sold or the farmer will have to sell himself into indentured servitude to repay what he owes. This release from debt every seven years allows the farmer to have a new start and to still keep his farm and his freedom.
The problem arouse when the Israelites began to develop a business class. In the cities, the release of debts was a serious impediment for developing capital for new ventures. As the seventh year approached, loans became impossible to get or with impossible terms. For this reason, the sages developed a law called “prosbul” where the debt was handed over to the court who did not have to release debts in the seventh year and could still claim payment when other debts had to be cancelled. While later Rabbis tried to fit this into the structure of Jewish Law, it was really a new idea that arose not from the law, but from the needs of the people. In much the same way that Conservative Judaism acts on behalf of the needs of the people today.
The reality of Judaism is that we no longer really follow the seven year cycle when we do not live in the land of Israel and we are far from the commitment to the calendar that our ancestors used to have. The whole process of releasing debts should have only applied to those who live in our holy land. The Sages tell us, however, that no matter where we live, we have an obligation for Jewish Law that insists that we continue to keep this basic Torah law in spite of it being almost impossible to enforce. Still, because of our love of G-d and our love of Torah, many pious Jews still include with all loans of substance, clauses that protect the lenders from losing their capital. Other Jews follow a different custom that teaches, that in monetary matters, “Dina d’malchuta dina” which means that the law of the land is the law. We follow the secular rules of lending money unless we are in the land of Israel where these laws are still very much a part of the legal landscape.
30-5767: Mitzvah 64
July 2, 2007
Mitzvah 64 – It is a positive commandment to release (cancel) a loan in the year of Shmitta (release).
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “every creditor shall release what he has lent his fellow.” (Deut. 15:2) If a borrower repays a creditor a loan over which the seventh year (shemitta) has passed, he is not to take it from him but is rather to tell him, “I release it”: for Scripture says, “And this is the manner (lit. the spoken word) of the release” (ibid). If the borrower says, “Nevertheless, take it.” He may accept it from him.
By the law of the Torah, the release of money obligations is in effect only at the time that the law of the jubilee year is in effect. But it is a decree of the Sages that the release of money obligations should be in force also in the present time, so that the law of release should not be forgotten by Jewry. However, a prosbul (the declaration in court after a loan is given that the shmitta year is not to cancel it) is effective against the law of released money obligations at the present time, that this loan should not be cancelled. It applies to both men and women.
The Torah is specific that a debt should be cancelled in the seventh year, the shmitta year. There is no basis in the Torah for getting around this release. That is why if the borrower comes to the lender and offers to repay it after the shmitta has begun, the lender must declare out loud, that he has released the borrower from his obligations for the loan. Only if the borrower insists on repayment, can the lender accept it.
The reason for this law reflects the reality of an agricultural economy. Farmers need cash to raise crops. They can borrow against the profit they will receive from their crops in the spring and repay it after the harvest is sold. That should leave the farmer with enough to feed his family and to be able to plant again in the spring. Any farmer knows, however, that the situation is far more precarious that that. Sometimes the produce prices are depressed after the harvest and they do not get enough money to repay the loan. Sometimes there are natural or man-made disasters that destroy the crops and leave the farmer with no way to repay the loan. A couple of bad growing seasons and the burden of debt can be so crushing that the farm will have to be sold or the farmer will have to sell himself into indentured servitude to repay what he owes. This release from debt every seven years allows the farmer to have a new start and to still keep his farm and his freedom.
The problem arouse when the Israelites began to develop a business class. In the cities, the release of debts was a serious impediment for developing capital for new ventures. As the seventh year approached, loans became impossible to get or with impossible terms. For this reason, the sages developed a law called “prosbul” where the debt was handed over to the court who did not have to release debts in the seventh year and could still claim payment when other debts had to be cancelled. While later Rabbis tried to fit this into the structure of Jewish Law, it was really a new idea that arose not from the law, but from the needs of the people. In much the same way that Conservative Judaism acts on behalf of the needs of the people today.
The reality of Judaism is that we no longer really follow the seven year cycle when we do not live in the land of Israel and we are far from the commitment to the calendar that our ancestors used to have. The whole process of releasing debts should have only applied to those who live in our holy land. The Sages tell us, however, that no matter where we live, we have an obligation for Jewish Law that insists that we continue to keep this basic Torah law in spite of it being almost impossible to enforce. Still, because of our love of G-d and our love of Torah, many pious Jews still include with all loans of substance, clauses that protect the lenders from losing their capital. Other Jews follow a different custom that teaches, that in monetary matters, “Dina d’malchuta dina” which means that the law of the land is the law. We follow the secular rules of lending money unless we are in the land of Israel where these laws are still very much a part of the legal landscape.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
29-5767: Mitzvah 63
Talmidav Shel Aharon
29-5767: Mitzvah 63
June 25, 2007
Mitzvah 63 – It is a positive commandment to give a pawned object back to its owner at the time that he needs it.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “you shall surely restore to him the pledge.” (Deut. 24:13) It is all one whether a person takes an object I pledge from another person through the court or he takes it with his own hand (directly), by force or with the borrower’s consent – he has this duty, and is to return him a pillow at night; and tools with which he does his work, or clothes that he wears in the daytime, he is to return him by day for the entire day. Whoever transgresses and does not return a pledged object at its proper time disobeys this positive commandment and violates one prohibition.
This rather simple Mitzvah cuts to the core of what it means to be live by Jewish Law. A person would only pawn something in order to raise some cash in an emergency. Most of the time such a person would pawn something of value that was not needed everyday. But sometimes, the need is such that something crucial to the family would have to be pawned. He might pawn his pillow upon which he needs to sleep. The tools by which he earns a living, clothing he needs to wear each day. Judaism insists that if we take that object as the collateral on the loan, we still maintain our ownership of it, but we can not prevent the borrower from using it when he needs it. We must return his pillow at night and he must return it to the lender in the morning. If we take his tools, we must return it before the borrower goes to work and he must return it to the lender when the days work is done. How could such a person ever hope to redeem the pledge and pay off the loan if he can not work, go out in the world or get a good night’s sleep.
The objects listed by the Hafetz Hayim are only examples. Anything that a person might need, cooking pots, uniforms, etc, all must be returned if it will prevent the borrower from being able to feed his family or earn the money to pay back the loan. The lender retains the “ownership” of the item, even if the borrower is using it, and it must be returned when the borrower no longer needs it. It does not matter if the collateral was seized by the lender or given to him by a court to pay off the loan. We cannot expect a person to pay back what is owed if we seize the very items that will make this possible.
Judaism demands justice even when we do business. Judaism does not say, “business is business” and turn its back on those in need. Capitalism demands that people pay back the loans they contract. But Judaism insists that a pledged item might still be needed and must therefore be returned to give a person a chance to get their life back in order. It is a beautiful part of our business law.
29-5767: Mitzvah 63
June 25, 2007
Mitzvah 63 – It is a positive commandment to give a pawned object back to its owner at the time that he needs it.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “you shall surely restore to him the pledge.” (Deut. 24:13) It is all one whether a person takes an object I pledge from another person through the court or he takes it with his own hand (directly), by force or with the borrower’s consent – he has this duty, and is to return him a pillow at night; and tools with which he does his work, or clothes that he wears in the daytime, he is to return him by day for the entire day. Whoever transgresses and does not return a pledged object at its proper time disobeys this positive commandment and violates one prohibition.
This rather simple Mitzvah cuts to the core of what it means to be live by Jewish Law. A person would only pawn something in order to raise some cash in an emergency. Most of the time such a person would pawn something of value that was not needed everyday. But sometimes, the need is such that something crucial to the family would have to be pawned. He might pawn his pillow upon which he needs to sleep. The tools by which he earns a living, clothing he needs to wear each day. Judaism insists that if we take that object as the collateral on the loan, we still maintain our ownership of it, but we can not prevent the borrower from using it when he needs it. We must return his pillow at night and he must return it to the lender in the morning. If we take his tools, we must return it before the borrower goes to work and he must return it to the lender when the days work is done. How could such a person ever hope to redeem the pledge and pay off the loan if he can not work, go out in the world or get a good night’s sleep.
The objects listed by the Hafetz Hayim are only examples. Anything that a person might need, cooking pots, uniforms, etc, all must be returned if it will prevent the borrower from being able to feed his family or earn the money to pay back the loan. The lender retains the “ownership” of the item, even if the borrower is using it, and it must be returned when the borrower no longer needs it. It does not matter if the collateral was seized by the lender or given to him by a court to pay off the loan. We cannot expect a person to pay back what is owed if we seize the very items that will make this possible.
Judaism demands justice even when we do business. Judaism does not say, “business is business” and turn its back on those in need. Capitalism demands that people pay back the loans they contract. But Judaism insists that a pledged item might still be needed and must therefore be returned to give a person a chance to get their life back in order. It is a beautiful part of our business law.
Monday, June 18, 2007
28-5767: Mitzvah 62
Talmidav Shel Aharon
28-5767: Mitzvah 62
June 18, 2007
Mitzvah 62 – It is a positive commandment to lend money to poor Jews.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “If you lend money to any of my people, to the poor with you.” (Ex. 22:24) and this is a duty. This mitzvah is greater than charity, and more obligatory. The Torah disapproves severely of anyone who refuses to lend to a poor person, since it says, “and your eye may be evil against your needy brother … and it will be a sin for you.” (Deut. 15:9) It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
According to Maimonides, the greatest form of charity is giving a loan to someone in need to help them get back on their feet. It is a form of giving that is respectful of the person who is in need and allows him or her to retain their dignity. The force of this Mitzvah, however goes even beyond this ruling.
Charity, as defined by the Hafetz Hayim, and by virtually all other sages, is not the same as what we call charity today. When we use the English word, “charity” we are usually referring to the giving of money out of the goodness of our heart to a worthy cause. In Hebrew, the word we use for charity has a very different meaning. “Tzedakah” is from the root meaning, “justice”. Social justice demands that we take account of the poor and hungry and we must help them in their time of need. It is not something left to the “goodness of our heart” but it is a requirement of all Jews to help those who are in need. It is simple justice that those who have enough should support those who do not.
This Mitzvah, takes Tzedaka to the next step. If we are able, we should move not just to help someone with their daily needs, but should feel obligated to help them out of the cycle of poverty as well. We all know that in a capitalistic society, one must have money before one can make money. This is the kind of capital investment that yields great rewards. Not in money returned for the investment, but in lives saved from poverty. It is giving another person a second chance in life. We are helping that person to start over trying to become a fully productive member of the community. It is important that we realize that if we feel that such a loan will indeed make a difference in that person’s life, we have an obligation to make the loan. That is the nature of this commandment.
Once again, because of the way the Biblical passage is written, there seems to be a bias to supporting Jews who are poor and not other non-Jews in the community. It is my feeling that we do have a requirement to support Jews first. That is, if we have limited resources, that we should make the effort to help our own poor before we help the other poor in the community. I hold this because it is similar to helping one’s own family before one helps the poor of other families.
However, this does not mean that we have no obligations to the other poor in our community. If we have the means to help lift others out of the cycle of poverty through loans of support, than we should be equally obligated to such loans. Clearly we can not personally end all poverty that we see around us, but if we feel that such a loan can have a lasting effect on a person and his/her family, we should not hesitate to make such a loan. The reason this applies is a principle in Jewish Law called “Mipnay Darkei Shalom” we do some things “for the sake of peace”. It is not just that people may feel angry that our money only goes to Jews, it is the greater reason that through such loans, those who are lifted from poverty will praise their benefactor, praise their faith and praise their G-d. It is a matter of Kiddush HaShem, the primary obligation to bring honor to the name of G-d.
It does no good to have charitable funds just sitting in the bank and not working to help ease the plight of poor families of any faith. We need to exercise our obligation to help others, all others, to get back on their feet.
28-5767: Mitzvah 62
June 18, 2007
Mitzvah 62 – It is a positive commandment to lend money to poor Jews.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “If you lend money to any of my people, to the poor with you.” (Ex. 22:24) and this is a duty. This mitzvah is greater than charity, and more obligatory. The Torah disapproves severely of anyone who refuses to lend to a poor person, since it says, “and your eye may be evil against your needy brother … and it will be a sin for you.” (Deut. 15:9) It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
According to Maimonides, the greatest form of charity is giving a loan to someone in need to help them get back on their feet. It is a form of giving that is respectful of the person who is in need and allows him or her to retain their dignity. The force of this Mitzvah, however goes even beyond this ruling.
Charity, as defined by the Hafetz Hayim, and by virtually all other sages, is not the same as what we call charity today. When we use the English word, “charity” we are usually referring to the giving of money out of the goodness of our heart to a worthy cause. In Hebrew, the word we use for charity has a very different meaning. “Tzedakah” is from the root meaning, “justice”. Social justice demands that we take account of the poor and hungry and we must help them in their time of need. It is not something left to the “goodness of our heart” but it is a requirement of all Jews to help those who are in need. It is simple justice that those who have enough should support those who do not.
This Mitzvah, takes Tzedaka to the next step. If we are able, we should move not just to help someone with their daily needs, but should feel obligated to help them out of the cycle of poverty as well. We all know that in a capitalistic society, one must have money before one can make money. This is the kind of capital investment that yields great rewards. Not in money returned for the investment, but in lives saved from poverty. It is giving another person a second chance in life. We are helping that person to start over trying to become a fully productive member of the community. It is important that we realize that if we feel that such a loan will indeed make a difference in that person’s life, we have an obligation to make the loan. That is the nature of this commandment.
Once again, because of the way the Biblical passage is written, there seems to be a bias to supporting Jews who are poor and not other non-Jews in the community. It is my feeling that we do have a requirement to support Jews first. That is, if we have limited resources, that we should make the effort to help our own poor before we help the other poor in the community. I hold this because it is similar to helping one’s own family before one helps the poor of other families.
However, this does not mean that we have no obligations to the other poor in our community. If we have the means to help lift others out of the cycle of poverty through loans of support, than we should be equally obligated to such loans. Clearly we can not personally end all poverty that we see around us, but if we feel that such a loan can have a lasting effect on a person and his/her family, we should not hesitate to make such a loan. The reason this applies is a principle in Jewish Law called “Mipnay Darkei Shalom” we do some things “for the sake of peace”. It is not just that people may feel angry that our money only goes to Jews, it is the greater reason that through such loans, those who are lifted from poverty will praise their benefactor, praise their faith and praise their G-d. It is a matter of Kiddush HaShem, the primary obligation to bring honor to the name of G-d.
It does no good to have charitable funds just sitting in the bank and not working to help ease the plight of poor families of any faith. We need to exercise our obligation to help others, all others, to get back on their feet.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
27-5767: Mitzvah 60 and 61
Talmidav Shel Aharon
27-5767: Mitzvah 60 and 61
June 11, 2007
Mitzvah 60 – It is a positive commandment to bear affection for everyone in Jewry as for oneself.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “and you shall love your fellow as yourself ” (Lev 19:18) It is therefore necessary to have as much protective concern for another person’s physical self, his items of monetary value and his esteem, as for one’s own. If someone derives honor from another’s disgrace, he as no share in the world to come. And included in this positive commandment is the religious duty of making peace between a man and his friend. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
Mitzvah 61 – It is a positive commandment to bear affection for a ger (stranger, convert)
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture states, “you shall therefore love the ger” (Deut. 10:19) This is a religious duty in addition to the precept, “You shall love your fellow as yourself” (Lev. 19:18) [since plainly a ger is included in general Jewry] The Holy One loves the ger since it is written, “He loves the stranger giving him food and clothing” (Deut. 10:18) and it says, “you know the heart of the stranger” (Ex. 23:9) The meaning of ger here is one who has come from another land or another city to live with us and all the more certainly someone who has converted to Judaism. It is in force everywhere and always, for both men and women.
The plain meaning of this mitzvah is that we should love everyone as we would love ourselves. Or as the Sage Hillel put it so succinctly, “Do no do to others what you would not want them to do to you.” Rabbi Akiva in the Talmud notes that this is the most important Mitzvah in the entire Torah. It seems so simple but the implications are so great. If we understand that we are commanded, obligated and required to treat all people with the same respect that we feel we deserve we will find ourselves treating others with respect and acting humbly at all times. We are not better than other people, we are no worse, we are all the same, needing the same support, the same love and the same concern that all other human beings require. If we provide that for others, they will, return that favor in our time of need. It cannot be stressed enough. Give others the love and respect that we think we deserve and the world will be a far more peaceful and loving place.
So why is this so hard to do? Why is this commandment that is so important so universally ignored or challenged. I think of the joke where one man says to another, “the guy who said we should love our neighbor never had MY neighbors!” You see a hint of this even in the Hafetz Hayim’s statements. I am not sure why he needed to make this two separate mitzvot. The commandment is clear, “Love your fellow as yourself.” It does not say, as the Hafetz Hayim says, “to love your fellow Israelite as yourself.” But in many circles, some that are populated by very pious people, feel that it only applies to Jews. Implying that one is not required to treat non-Jews in this manner. While there are many important Sages in ancient and modern times who may hold this position, I , and many other Rabbis as well feel that this is a completely wrong interpretation. I will say it clearly and completely, Leviticus requires that we treat all people, Jews, non-Jews, converts, pagans, obnoxious people, people who are dumber than us, people who disagree with us, people who look different, people of a different gender, people who talk different, our enemies, the enemies of our friends, people who think they are better than us, people who are more popular than us, people who we feel are keeping us from our full potential, all of these must be treated at all times with respect just as we would want to be treated. In short, read this Mitzvah literally, “Love your fellow as yourself”.
A good friend of mine, Rabbi Irwin Kula of CLAL, teaches that if you can’t love your fellow as yourself, than don’t look at the other person to see why you can’t love him, rather look inside yourself. This does not mean you have to like everyone you meet, only that they deserve your respect at all times. No matter how you may feel about another person you should be able to sit at the same table, engage in civil discussion, not speak nasty words behind his or her back and not engage in gossip about anyone. If you disagree you are allowed to express your opinion, and you must listen to their opinion. You are to act with respect and civility at all times.
The reality is that if you keep just this one Mitzvah, it will bring in its wake almost all the other mitzvot as well. Just loving our neighbor as yourself, you will be on your way to observing all the mitzvot “bain Adam L’chavero” “between one human being and another.” We can say even further that if we treat all human beings with kindness and love, we are also in fulfillment of most of the other commandments which are “bain Adam L’Makom” “between a human being and G-d”. It is for this reason that the modern Siddur used by the Conservative movement includes, near the beginning of the morning service, a prayer offered by the “Ari” in the 17th century. “Behold I am about the fulfill the Mitzvah of my Creator to Love my fellow human being as myself”. If we can say this prayer first thing every morning, and let is guide us all day, it will be much harder to go astray from the path G-d desires. One last point, note the punishment for one who derives a living from embarrassing or deriving personal honor from disgracing someone else. Such a person loses his or her share in the world to come. Trafficking in gossip, trading in slander and promoting yourself by denigrating someone else, is a high crime indeed. Speak only of your own good points and never put anyone else down so you can look better. The Hafetz Hayim reminds us that there are special punishments in hell for those who would make a living doing this. This is why we all need to be so careful and “Love our neighbor as yourself.”
27-5767: Mitzvah 60 and 61
June 11, 2007
Mitzvah 60 – It is a positive commandment to bear affection for everyone in Jewry as for oneself.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “and you shall love your fellow as yourself ” (Lev 19:18) It is therefore necessary to have as much protective concern for another person’s physical self, his items of monetary value and his esteem, as for one’s own. If someone derives honor from another’s disgrace, he as no share in the world to come. And included in this positive commandment is the religious duty of making peace between a man and his friend. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
Mitzvah 61 – It is a positive commandment to bear affection for a ger (stranger, convert)
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture states, “you shall therefore love the ger” (Deut. 10:19) This is a religious duty in addition to the precept, “You shall love your fellow as yourself” (Lev. 19:18) [since plainly a ger is included in general Jewry] The Holy One loves the ger since it is written, “He loves the stranger giving him food and clothing” (Deut. 10:18) and it says, “you know the heart of the stranger” (Ex. 23:9) The meaning of ger here is one who has come from another land or another city to live with us and all the more certainly someone who has converted to Judaism. It is in force everywhere and always, for both men and women.
The plain meaning of this mitzvah is that we should love everyone as we would love ourselves. Or as the Sage Hillel put it so succinctly, “Do no do to others what you would not want them to do to you.” Rabbi Akiva in the Talmud notes that this is the most important Mitzvah in the entire Torah. It seems so simple but the implications are so great. If we understand that we are commanded, obligated and required to treat all people with the same respect that we feel we deserve we will find ourselves treating others with respect and acting humbly at all times. We are not better than other people, we are no worse, we are all the same, needing the same support, the same love and the same concern that all other human beings require. If we provide that for others, they will, return that favor in our time of need. It cannot be stressed enough. Give others the love and respect that we think we deserve and the world will be a far more peaceful and loving place.
So why is this so hard to do? Why is this commandment that is so important so universally ignored or challenged. I think of the joke where one man says to another, “the guy who said we should love our neighbor never had MY neighbors!” You see a hint of this even in the Hafetz Hayim’s statements. I am not sure why he needed to make this two separate mitzvot. The commandment is clear, “Love your fellow as yourself.” It does not say, as the Hafetz Hayim says, “to love your fellow Israelite as yourself.” But in many circles, some that are populated by very pious people, feel that it only applies to Jews. Implying that one is not required to treat non-Jews in this manner. While there are many important Sages in ancient and modern times who may hold this position, I , and many other Rabbis as well feel that this is a completely wrong interpretation. I will say it clearly and completely, Leviticus requires that we treat all people, Jews, non-Jews, converts, pagans, obnoxious people, people who are dumber than us, people who disagree with us, people who look different, people of a different gender, people who talk different, our enemies, the enemies of our friends, people who think they are better than us, people who are more popular than us, people who we feel are keeping us from our full potential, all of these must be treated at all times with respect just as we would want to be treated. In short, read this Mitzvah literally, “Love your fellow as yourself”.
A good friend of mine, Rabbi Irwin Kula of CLAL, teaches that if you can’t love your fellow as yourself, than don’t look at the other person to see why you can’t love him, rather look inside yourself. This does not mean you have to like everyone you meet, only that they deserve your respect at all times. No matter how you may feel about another person you should be able to sit at the same table, engage in civil discussion, not speak nasty words behind his or her back and not engage in gossip about anyone. If you disagree you are allowed to express your opinion, and you must listen to their opinion. You are to act with respect and civility at all times.
The reality is that if you keep just this one Mitzvah, it will bring in its wake almost all the other mitzvot as well. Just loving our neighbor as yourself, you will be on your way to observing all the mitzvot “bain Adam L’chavero” “between one human being and another.” We can say even further that if we treat all human beings with kindness and love, we are also in fulfillment of most of the other commandments which are “bain Adam L’Makom” “between a human being and G-d”. It is for this reason that the modern Siddur used by the Conservative movement includes, near the beginning of the morning service, a prayer offered by the “Ari” in the 17th century. “Behold I am about the fulfill the Mitzvah of my Creator to Love my fellow human being as myself”. If we can say this prayer first thing every morning, and let is guide us all day, it will be much harder to go astray from the path G-d desires. One last point, note the punishment for one who derives a living from embarrassing or deriving personal honor from disgracing someone else. Such a person loses his or her share in the world to come. Trafficking in gossip, trading in slander and promoting yourself by denigrating someone else, is a high crime indeed. Speak only of your own good points and never put anyone else down so you can look better. The Hafetz Hayim reminds us that there are special punishments in hell for those who would make a living doing this. This is why we all need to be so careful and “Love our neighbor as yourself.”
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
25-5767: Mitzvah 59
Talmidav Shel Aharon
25-5767: Mitzvah 59
June 4, 2007
Mitzvah 59 – It is a positive commandment that a Kohen is to defile himself for close kin (by attending to their burial)
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “for his mother, his father, and for his son and his daughter, and for his unwed sister … for her he shall defile himself. ” (Lev 21:2-3) Although a Kohen is forbidden to become ritually unclean for other dead people, for close kin, however, he has a duty to become defiled ( in attending their burial.) and he has to defile himself for his wife to whom he is married. As for his brother and sister, it applied to those from the same father. Women are not required to become defiled for close kin, but the right to do so is theirs, and they have to observe mourning. This commandment includes within it the religious duty to mourn; that all Jews have a religious obligation to mourn for each of the seven relatives mentioned above. The first day of mourning is decreed by the Torah, while the other days of mourning are by the rule of the Sages. It is in effect everywhere, in every time.
This lesson is easy and hard at the same time. On the one hand, understanding the rules of the Kohanim are easy. A Kohen is not allowed to make himself ritually impure on purpose. There are enough accidents that can happen that need to be addressed that a Kohen cannot do something that will make him ritually impure with intention. There are a few exceptions. For example, if there is an unclaimed body that is in need of burial and there is no one else to bury it, it is a mitzvah for the Kohen to bury that body.
Here we have one of the other exceptions. Ritual impurity from a dead human body is the most severe form of ritual impurity (Tumah). Only the ashes from a properly sacrificed red cow can make a person pure again. This is one of the reasons a Kohen cannot attend to the dead. It would make them impure for seven days. (Another reason is that priests in Egypt, where Israel had a lot of experience, priests dealt with the dead all the time. To prevent this kind of a death cult, Israelite priests were forbidden to take part in funeral rituals.) There has to be a major exception to these rules for the immediate family of a Kohen. It would be both cruel and inhumane to prevent a Kohen from attending to the funeral of seven close relatives. The Torah lists parents, siblings and children as six for which the Kohen may make himself ritually impure with intention. The Sages added a seventh, the spouse. The High Priest cannot make himself impure even for these since there are others in the family who could attend to the funeral beside himself. For this reason a Kohen who is sensitive to these matters will not attend a funeral where the body is present or go to a cemetery. He cannot be in any building that contains a dead body nor can he step over a body in an open place. Only for the seven relatives can he make himself impure. So much for the easy part.
From this Mitzvah, we learn, however, how everyone else is to mourn. According to the law, we are official mourners when one of the seven relatives dies. (parents, siblings, children and spouse) We are commanded to make a tear in our clothing for them, to attend to their funeral and to mourn them after the interment. The tear can be made in the shirt, coat or tie that we are wearing or on a special ribbon that we wear. For a parent, the tear is made on the left side, over the heart. For everyone else it is worn on the right side. For the seven relatives, the mourner becomes exempt from time bound positive Mitzvot while preparing for the funeral.
After the funeral, the mourner observes three set time periods. The most intense mourning is done during the first seven days after the burial. (The exception is Shabbat when no mourning is allowed). During this time a candle burns in the home where the person is observing Shiva (the seven day period is called Shiva) the person does not wear leather soled shoes, one does not put on makeup or shave, and one does not leave the house. Friends and other family members bring them food and other necessities and a service is held in the home so that the family does not have to attend synagogue. The service is held daily from the day of the funeral (counted as the first day) until the morning of the seventh day (you need only observe the first hours of the seventh day) If the seventh day is Shabbat, Shiva ends at noon on Friday. Shiva is temporarily lifted at noon on Friday so that mourners can prepare for Shabbat. Shiva is then restarted when Shabbat is over (unless Shabbat was the last day).
The second period is Sheloshim, it is a 30-day period that begins the first day of Shiva and continues after Shiva is finished. During Sheloshim, one begins to get back to work and get on with life, except that one does not attend parties with music or live music events (concerts, musicals etc). There is an exception if the mourner actually earns his or her living making music or creating parties (band leaders or caterers for example). The third period is the year that begins with the burial and ends with the first anniversary of the death. (Which may or may not be the same day.) During this time the mourner attends services daily so that Kaddish can be recited. If the mourner is able, the mourner should lead a part or the whole of the service. A mourner cannot have a Torah honor, however until Sheloshim is finished. Kaddish is customarily recited only 11 months. This is based on the theory that a soul that dies must pass through punishments to atone for sins in this world. The more sins, the more punishment is given out. Judaism believes, however, that the punishment can not last for more than 12 months when everyone has been punished enough and has earned Gan Eden (Heaven). Kaddish is a way we can help alleviate the punishment. We say it for 11 months because if we go longer, we would be insulting the dead by implying that they were so sinful that they needed to be punished the full 12 months! Kaddish must be recited with a minyan, 10 adult Jews. A mourner is required to attend minyan to say Kaddish as long as a Minyan is available. If there is no minyan one can study in the name of the deceased instead.
If one of the major Festivals of the year occurs during Shiva or Sheloshim, the festival interrupts the mourning and it is NOT continued after the holiday. If the death occurs on the Festival, the funereal has to wait until the intermediate days and then Shiva/Sheloshim begin when the holiday is over. If there is one hour before the holiday when mourning has occurred, than the rest of Shiva is suspended. In the case of Sukkot/Shemini Atzeret, since this is two separate holidays that occur back to back, it not only ends Shiva, but Sheloshim as well,
The exception to all of this is the rules for the death of a parent. The restrictions of music and parties continue on for the full year. This is in recognition of the deeper role a parent plays in our lives. Some will wear their torn clothing for the full 30 days rather than the usual seven days of Shiva.
As with all complicated rules of Judaism, the easiest way to answer all questions about funeral practices in Judaism is to consult your Rabbi.
25-5767: Mitzvah 59
June 4, 2007
Mitzvah 59 – It is a positive commandment that a Kohen is to defile himself for close kin (by attending to their burial)
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “for his mother, his father, and for his son and his daughter, and for his unwed sister … for her he shall defile himself. ” (Lev 21:2-3) Although a Kohen is forbidden to become ritually unclean for other dead people, for close kin, however, he has a duty to become defiled ( in attending their burial.) and he has to defile himself for his wife to whom he is married. As for his brother and sister, it applied to those from the same father. Women are not required to become defiled for close kin, but the right to do so is theirs, and they have to observe mourning. This commandment includes within it the religious duty to mourn; that all Jews have a religious obligation to mourn for each of the seven relatives mentioned above. The first day of mourning is decreed by the Torah, while the other days of mourning are by the rule of the Sages. It is in effect everywhere, in every time.
This lesson is easy and hard at the same time. On the one hand, understanding the rules of the Kohanim are easy. A Kohen is not allowed to make himself ritually impure on purpose. There are enough accidents that can happen that need to be addressed that a Kohen cannot do something that will make him ritually impure with intention. There are a few exceptions. For example, if there is an unclaimed body that is in need of burial and there is no one else to bury it, it is a mitzvah for the Kohen to bury that body.
Here we have one of the other exceptions. Ritual impurity from a dead human body is the most severe form of ritual impurity (Tumah). Only the ashes from a properly sacrificed red cow can make a person pure again. This is one of the reasons a Kohen cannot attend to the dead. It would make them impure for seven days. (Another reason is that priests in Egypt, where Israel had a lot of experience, priests dealt with the dead all the time. To prevent this kind of a death cult, Israelite priests were forbidden to take part in funeral rituals.) There has to be a major exception to these rules for the immediate family of a Kohen. It would be both cruel and inhumane to prevent a Kohen from attending to the funeral of seven close relatives. The Torah lists parents, siblings and children as six for which the Kohen may make himself ritually impure with intention. The Sages added a seventh, the spouse. The High Priest cannot make himself impure even for these since there are others in the family who could attend to the funeral beside himself. For this reason a Kohen who is sensitive to these matters will not attend a funeral where the body is present or go to a cemetery. He cannot be in any building that contains a dead body nor can he step over a body in an open place. Only for the seven relatives can he make himself impure. So much for the easy part.
From this Mitzvah, we learn, however, how everyone else is to mourn. According to the law, we are official mourners when one of the seven relatives dies. (parents, siblings, children and spouse) We are commanded to make a tear in our clothing for them, to attend to their funeral and to mourn them after the interment. The tear can be made in the shirt, coat or tie that we are wearing or on a special ribbon that we wear. For a parent, the tear is made on the left side, over the heart. For everyone else it is worn on the right side. For the seven relatives, the mourner becomes exempt from time bound positive Mitzvot while preparing for the funeral.
After the funeral, the mourner observes three set time periods. The most intense mourning is done during the first seven days after the burial. (The exception is Shabbat when no mourning is allowed). During this time a candle burns in the home where the person is observing Shiva (the seven day period is called Shiva) the person does not wear leather soled shoes, one does not put on makeup or shave, and one does not leave the house. Friends and other family members bring them food and other necessities and a service is held in the home so that the family does not have to attend synagogue. The service is held daily from the day of the funeral (counted as the first day) until the morning of the seventh day (you need only observe the first hours of the seventh day) If the seventh day is Shabbat, Shiva ends at noon on Friday. Shiva is temporarily lifted at noon on Friday so that mourners can prepare for Shabbat. Shiva is then restarted when Shabbat is over (unless Shabbat was the last day).
The second period is Sheloshim, it is a 30-day period that begins the first day of Shiva and continues after Shiva is finished. During Sheloshim, one begins to get back to work and get on with life, except that one does not attend parties with music or live music events (concerts, musicals etc). There is an exception if the mourner actually earns his or her living making music or creating parties (band leaders or caterers for example). The third period is the year that begins with the burial and ends with the first anniversary of the death. (Which may or may not be the same day.) During this time the mourner attends services daily so that Kaddish can be recited. If the mourner is able, the mourner should lead a part or the whole of the service. A mourner cannot have a Torah honor, however until Sheloshim is finished. Kaddish is customarily recited only 11 months. This is based on the theory that a soul that dies must pass through punishments to atone for sins in this world. The more sins, the more punishment is given out. Judaism believes, however, that the punishment can not last for more than 12 months when everyone has been punished enough and has earned Gan Eden (Heaven). Kaddish is a way we can help alleviate the punishment. We say it for 11 months because if we go longer, we would be insulting the dead by implying that they were so sinful that they needed to be punished the full 12 months! Kaddish must be recited with a minyan, 10 adult Jews. A mourner is required to attend minyan to say Kaddish as long as a Minyan is available. If there is no minyan one can study in the name of the deceased instead.
If one of the major Festivals of the year occurs during Shiva or Sheloshim, the festival interrupts the mourning and it is NOT continued after the holiday. If the death occurs on the Festival, the funereal has to wait until the intermediate days and then Shiva/Sheloshim begin when the holiday is over. If there is one hour before the holiday when mourning has occurred, than the rest of Shiva is suspended. In the case of Sukkot/Shemini Atzeret, since this is two separate holidays that occur back to back, it not only ends Shiva, but Sheloshim as well,
The exception to all of this is the rules for the death of a parent. The restrictions of music and parties continue on for the full year. This is in recognition of the deeper role a parent plays in our lives. Some will wear their torn clothing for the full 30 days rather than the usual seven days of Shiva.
As with all complicated rules of Judaism, the easiest way to answer all questions about funeral practices in Judaism is to consult your Rabbi.
Monday, May 28, 2007
24-5767: Mitzvah 58
Talmidav Shel Aharon
24-5767: Mitzvah 58
May 28, 2007
Mitzvah 57 – It is a positive commandment that the Kohanim are to bless the Jewish people.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “Thus you shall bless the children if Israel … May G-d bless you and keep you, May G-d make the divine face to shine on you … May G-d lift up the divine face … ” (Num. 6:23-26) If a Kohen adds some other blessing , he transgresses the prohibition “You shall not add …” (Deut. 13:1)If a Kohen did not go up (to give the blessing) when the reader called out, “Kohanim” he would disobey the positive commandment and violate three religious charges (See Num. 6:23,27)but any Kohen who gives the blessing will be blessed, as Scripture says, “I will bless those who bless you” (Gen. 12:3) It is in effect everywhere, in every time.
For the last few weeks we have been tracing the last few laws that apply to the Kohanim, the descendants of Aaron, the brother of Moses, who were designated as priests for eternity by G-d in the Torah. This is clearly the greatest honor that a Kohan can perform, that of blessing the people. There is no one else in Judaism who is allowed to call G-d’s blessing upon the people. Since many have not seen this ritual blessing of the Kohanim, let me describe the procedure.
During the repetition of the Amidah, the Kohanim are called to give the blessing. They need to remove their shoes, and, if a Levite is present, they are to wash the hands of the Kohen. If no Levite is present, the Kohanim do it themselves. They then stand in front of the Ark on some kind of a raised platform. Sometimes it is a small box. I have seen them stand on a special rug, the height of the rug being enough to have them stand “above” the congregation. They stand with their backs to the congregation. The reader then calls out “Kohanim” the call that is described by the Hafetz Hayyim, they then place their Tallit over their heads so that their face can not be seen. They turn and face the congregation, they extend their arms out at shoulder height, holding their fingers in a position that makes their hand into the shape of the Hebrew letter “Shin” with the Tallit still draped over their heads and arms. They recite the blessing for the privilege of reciting a blessing in G-d’s name. They then wave their hands over the congregation as they recite the words from the Book of Numbers. The Reader (Shaliach Tzibur) calls out the words to the blessing in a soft voice, one word at a time, and the Kohanim repeat that world with a loud voice. They repeat each word until the threefold blessing is finished. They then turn around and face the ark again and stay on the bima until the final blessing of the Amidah is recited by the Reader (the blessing “Sim Shalom”). They then leave the bima and put their shoes on and then return to the congregation. It is customary for the congregation not to look directly at the Kohanim during the blessing, but to look down or away from them.
Any Kohen, who is descended from a Kohen on their father’s side can give the blessing. Conservative Judaism has ruled that a woman who has a father who is a Kohen can recite the blessing but the child of a woman who is a Kohen does not inherit the title. In a place where there are no Kohanim, the ceremony is not performed and the Reader merely reads the words of the priestly benediction. There must be a minyan present for the Kohanim to bless.
In Israel this blessing is done at all Shacharit (morning) services. Outside of Israel it is often not done or only done on the three pilgrimage festivals during Musaf when it does not fall on Shabbat. Like circumcision, when one sees the Kohanim blessing the people, we realize that we are in the presence of a very old and sacred ritual. The three part blessing includes blessings for wealth, wisdom, kindness, forgiveness, that G-d should listen to our prayers and a prayer for peace. Each of the three verses is longer than the ones that come before it to give the impression of a cascading blessing that is overflowing with good things. In this case the Kohanim are not “blessing” the people themselves, but are calling down G-d’s blessing on the people. One does not add to the words of the blessing nor take any away. The Reader leads the Kohanim so as to make sure they do not forget a word or lose their place.
24-5767: Mitzvah 58
May 28, 2007
Mitzvah 57 – It is a positive commandment that the Kohanim are to bless the Jewish people.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “Thus you shall bless the children if Israel … May G-d bless you and keep you, May G-d make the divine face to shine on you … May G-d lift up the divine face … ” (Num. 6:23-26) If a Kohen adds some other blessing , he transgresses the prohibition “You shall not add …” (Deut. 13:1)If a Kohen did not go up (to give the blessing) when the reader called out, “Kohanim” he would disobey the positive commandment and violate three religious charges (See Num. 6:23,27)but any Kohen who gives the blessing will be blessed, as Scripture says, “I will bless those who bless you” (Gen. 12:3) It is in effect everywhere, in every time.
For the last few weeks we have been tracing the last few laws that apply to the Kohanim, the descendants of Aaron, the brother of Moses, who were designated as priests for eternity by G-d in the Torah. This is clearly the greatest honor that a Kohan can perform, that of blessing the people. There is no one else in Judaism who is allowed to call G-d’s blessing upon the people. Since many have not seen this ritual blessing of the Kohanim, let me describe the procedure.
During the repetition of the Amidah, the Kohanim are called to give the blessing. They need to remove their shoes, and, if a Levite is present, they are to wash the hands of the Kohen. If no Levite is present, the Kohanim do it themselves. They then stand in front of the Ark on some kind of a raised platform. Sometimes it is a small box. I have seen them stand on a special rug, the height of the rug being enough to have them stand “above” the congregation. They stand with their backs to the congregation. The reader then calls out “Kohanim” the call that is described by the Hafetz Hayyim, they then place their Tallit over their heads so that their face can not be seen. They turn and face the congregation, they extend their arms out at shoulder height, holding their fingers in a position that makes their hand into the shape of the Hebrew letter “Shin” with the Tallit still draped over their heads and arms. They recite the blessing for the privilege of reciting a blessing in G-d’s name. They then wave their hands over the congregation as they recite the words from the Book of Numbers. The Reader (Shaliach Tzibur) calls out the words to the blessing in a soft voice, one word at a time, and the Kohanim repeat that world with a loud voice. They repeat each word until the threefold blessing is finished. They then turn around and face the ark again and stay on the bima until the final blessing of the Amidah is recited by the Reader (the blessing “Sim Shalom”). They then leave the bima and put their shoes on and then return to the congregation. It is customary for the congregation not to look directly at the Kohanim during the blessing, but to look down or away from them.
Any Kohen, who is descended from a Kohen on their father’s side can give the blessing. Conservative Judaism has ruled that a woman who has a father who is a Kohen can recite the blessing but the child of a woman who is a Kohen does not inherit the title. In a place where there are no Kohanim, the ceremony is not performed and the Reader merely reads the words of the priestly benediction. There must be a minyan present for the Kohanim to bless.
In Israel this blessing is done at all Shacharit (morning) services. Outside of Israel it is often not done or only done on the three pilgrimage festivals during Musaf when it does not fall on Shabbat. Like circumcision, when one sees the Kohanim blessing the people, we realize that we are in the presence of a very old and sacred ritual. The three part blessing includes blessings for wealth, wisdom, kindness, forgiveness, that G-d should listen to our prayers and a prayer for peace. Each of the three verses is longer than the ones that come before it to give the impression of a cascading blessing that is overflowing with good things. In this case the Kohanim are not “blessing” the people themselves, but are calling down G-d’s blessing on the people. One does not add to the words of the blessing nor take any away. The Reader leads the Kohanim so as to make sure they do not forget a word or lose their place.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
23-5767: Mitzvah 57
Talmidav Shel Aharon
23-5767: Mitzvah 57
May 21, 2007
Mitzvah 57 – It is a positive commandment to separate a dough-cake from a batch of dough and give it to the Kohen
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “of the first of your dough you shall set apart Hallah (a cake)” (Num. 15:20) If it is one of the five species of grain (see #23) and in his dough there is a bulk of 43 and 1/5 eggs, one has the duty of separating Hallah, a portion of the dough. In countries other than Israel, Hallah has to be separated by the law of the Sages, so that the procedure should not be forgotten; and it is burned. By the law of the Torah there is no set amount for it, but any piece of dough whatever frees one of the obligation.
Hallah, or Challah, is not a twisted loaf of bread, it is a small pinch of dough that is separated from the main batch before it is baked and burned up in the fire. It is the last remnant of a dough sacrifice that is mentioned in the Torah (Numbers 15:20). It only applies to certain types of dough and only dough that is made in the land of Israel. It is only a later Rabbinic enactment that we, in the Diaspora, are told to separate the dough of Hallah and burn it in the fire. As the Hafetz Hayyim says, they enacted it so that the requirement would not be forgotten in our exile.
The dough has to be made of one of the four types of grain that are mentioned in the Torah. These are the same five grains that can be used on Pesach to make Matzah and which are forbidden if they are allowed to ferment for more than 18 minutes. These grains are wheat, barley, spelt, oats and rye. Hallah does not have to be “taken” from the dough from any other grain. In fact, you may notice on boxes of Matzah for Passover the notation that “Hallah has been taken” to let you know that the pinch of dough was separated and burned according to the law. Technically, a private home, making dough for the family, is making too small a batch to be required to “take Hallah” but in fact, many women still take a small pinch from the batch of dough before they bake it, and burn it in the bottom of the oven. As noted above, there is no set amount that needs to be burned. It only has to be a “pinch”.
The size requirement above, 43 1/5 eggs is not the amount of egg put into the dough, but a mass of dough that is the size of 43 and 1/5 eggs. An “egg” is a unit of measurement used by the Rabbis. An “egg” equals 91.6 cubic centimeters so the amount of dough by today’s measurements would be 3957.12 cc. or 241.5 cubic inches.
How did the braided bread that we use for Shabbat come to be called Hallah? I suspect that just as we make a special effort to use kosher wine when we want to say a blessing, so too we make a special effort to use “kosher” bread when we want to say a blessing. Not only does the bread need to be made with kosher ingredients, but, unless “hallah as been taken” it is still not ready for a blessing. Eventually the only bread that was made with the pinch taken and burned was the bread for Shabbat and Holidays, and it took the name of the pinch that was taken. As if the question would be asked, “Was it Hallah’ed?” and eventually the bread took on the name.
As far as I know, all kosher bakeries still remove and burn some dough from every batch of bread that is baked.
23-5767: Mitzvah 57
May 21, 2007
Mitzvah 57 – It is a positive commandment to separate a dough-cake from a batch of dough and give it to the Kohen
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “of the first of your dough you shall set apart Hallah (a cake)” (Num. 15:20) If it is one of the five species of grain (see #23) and in his dough there is a bulk of 43 and 1/5 eggs, one has the duty of separating Hallah, a portion of the dough. In countries other than Israel, Hallah has to be separated by the law of the Sages, so that the procedure should not be forgotten; and it is burned. By the law of the Torah there is no set amount for it, but any piece of dough whatever frees one of the obligation.
Hallah, or Challah, is not a twisted loaf of bread, it is a small pinch of dough that is separated from the main batch before it is baked and burned up in the fire. It is the last remnant of a dough sacrifice that is mentioned in the Torah (Numbers 15:20). It only applies to certain types of dough and only dough that is made in the land of Israel. It is only a later Rabbinic enactment that we, in the Diaspora, are told to separate the dough of Hallah and burn it in the fire. As the Hafetz Hayyim says, they enacted it so that the requirement would not be forgotten in our exile.
The dough has to be made of one of the four types of grain that are mentioned in the Torah. These are the same five grains that can be used on Pesach to make Matzah and which are forbidden if they are allowed to ferment for more than 18 minutes. These grains are wheat, barley, spelt, oats and rye. Hallah does not have to be “taken” from the dough from any other grain. In fact, you may notice on boxes of Matzah for Passover the notation that “Hallah has been taken” to let you know that the pinch of dough was separated and burned according to the law. Technically, a private home, making dough for the family, is making too small a batch to be required to “take Hallah” but in fact, many women still take a small pinch from the batch of dough before they bake it, and burn it in the bottom of the oven. As noted above, there is no set amount that needs to be burned. It only has to be a “pinch”.
The size requirement above, 43 1/5 eggs is not the amount of egg put into the dough, but a mass of dough that is the size of 43 and 1/5 eggs. An “egg” is a unit of measurement used by the Rabbis. An “egg” equals 91.6 cubic centimeters so the amount of dough by today’s measurements would be 3957.12 cc. or 241.5 cubic inches.
How did the braided bread that we use for Shabbat come to be called Hallah? I suspect that just as we make a special effort to use kosher wine when we want to say a blessing, so too we make a special effort to use “kosher” bread when we want to say a blessing. Not only does the bread need to be made with kosher ingredients, but, unless “hallah as been taken” it is still not ready for a blessing. Eventually the only bread that was made with the pinch taken and burned was the bread for Shabbat and Holidays, and it took the name of the pinch that was taken. As if the question would be asked, “Was it Hallah’ed?” and eventually the bread took on the name.
As far as I know, all kosher bakeries still remove and burn some dough from every batch of bread that is baked.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
22-5767: Mitzvah 55-56
Talmidav Shel Aharon
22-5767: Mitzvah 55-56
May 13, 2007
Mitzvah 55 – It is a positive commandment to redeem a firstling male donkey for a lamb.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “And the firstling of a donkey thou shall redeem with a lamb” (Ex. 34:20) and he gives the lamb to the Kohen, since Scripture says, “Everything that opens the womb … shall be yours” (Num. 18:15) Kohanim and Levites are free of this obligation. If one has no lamb with which to redeem it, he may redeem it for its monetary value, giving its price to the Kohen. If the firstling donkey was worth ten “selaiim”, he may redeem it with a lamb worth a dinar. Kohanim and Levites are free of this obligation as well. It is in effect everywhere and every time. It applies to both men and women.
Mitzvah 56 –It is a positive commandment to break the neck of a firstling male donkey if it has not been redeemed
Hafetz Hayim: as Scripture states, “and if you will not redeem it, then you hsall break its neck” (Ex. 34:20) Breaking its neck means striking it with a butcher’s hatchet at the back of its neck until it dies. It must be with a butcher’s hatchet and nothing else and not by any other form of death. Any benefit from it is forbidden even after the neck is broken and it requires burial, its ash is also forbidden. It is in effect everywhere in every time for both men and women but Kohanim and Levites are free of the obligation.
I admit that these seem weird, ancient and bizarre, but there is a lesson underneath all of this. So first, let me defend the poor donkey. Since it would be absurd to kill a young donkey and not redeem it by giving the lamb or the value of a lamb to a Kohen, it is unlikely that anyone will have to destroy a baby donkey.
That being said, what is the purpose of laws such as these? We assume that G-d loves all the creatures of the world equally and that there should be little reason to treat the donkey in this way. The commentators note that the donkey was the only domesticated animal that was unfit for sacrifice. Judaism reminds us that all we own, the most valuable of possessions as well as the least of what we have, all, in an ultimate way, belong to G-d. As a reminder of this, we are to dedicate the first of all things in nature, back to G-d. It is the “tax” we pay to the one who gives breath to all life. If the fruit, vegetable or animal is fit to be offered directly to G-d, than that is how it is to be handled. If for any reason it cannot be offered to G-d, the value of the offering is given to a Kohen or a Levite. Since we no longer have a Temple to sacrifice to G-d, all offerings are therefore, redeemed by giving money to a Kohen.
Since a Kohen or Levite dedicate their own lives to G-d, everything they own is already dedicated to G-d and can not be redeemed. Once something is declared “holy” it belongs to G-d and we mortals can not use it in any way nor derive any benefit from it. That is why, if we fail to redeem it, we can’t use it in any way at all, even after it is dead. We can’t use the meat, bones, hide or even the ashes. It all belongs to G-d. The unusual method of killing the donkey was specified lest someone think that the animal was being sacrificed.
What are we to make of these kinds of laws, tied to sacrifices that we no longer offer and to animals that no longer are a part of our possessions? I think that this should remind us that all we have, all that we make or grow, we have because of the love and care of our Creator. We should use these laws to remind ourselves that we need to take a part of all we make, and all we grow, perhaps we can even extend it to beginning a new job or opening a new store. Some of the first profits from that enterprise should be directed to G-d. It can be given to a Kohen if one would like, but even if it is given to charity as a way or extending our thanks to G-d for the opportunities with which we have been blessed.
In a world where everyone seems to be saying “It’s all MINE!” We need to pause and remember that all we are and all we have are just blessing. Blessing shared with us by the merciful G-d.
22-5767: Mitzvah 55-56
May 13, 2007
Mitzvah 55 – It is a positive commandment to redeem a firstling male donkey for a lamb.
Hafetz Hayim: As Scripture says: “And the firstling of a donkey thou shall redeem with a lamb” (Ex. 34:20) and he gives the lamb to the Kohen, since Scripture says, “Everything that opens the womb … shall be yours” (Num. 18:15) Kohanim and Levites are free of this obligation. If one has no lamb with which to redeem it, he may redeem it for its monetary value, giving its price to the Kohen. If the firstling donkey was worth ten “selaiim”, he may redeem it with a lamb worth a dinar. Kohanim and Levites are free of this obligation as well. It is in effect everywhere and every time. It applies to both men and women.
Mitzvah 56 –It is a positive commandment to break the neck of a firstling male donkey if it has not been redeemed
Hafetz Hayim: as Scripture states, “and if you will not redeem it, then you hsall break its neck” (Ex. 34:20) Breaking its neck means striking it with a butcher’s hatchet at the back of its neck until it dies. It must be with a butcher’s hatchet and nothing else and not by any other form of death. Any benefit from it is forbidden even after the neck is broken and it requires burial, its ash is also forbidden. It is in effect everywhere in every time for both men and women but Kohanim and Levites are free of the obligation.
I admit that these seem weird, ancient and bizarre, but there is a lesson underneath all of this. So first, let me defend the poor donkey. Since it would be absurd to kill a young donkey and not redeem it by giving the lamb or the value of a lamb to a Kohen, it is unlikely that anyone will have to destroy a baby donkey.
That being said, what is the purpose of laws such as these? We assume that G-d loves all the creatures of the world equally and that there should be little reason to treat the donkey in this way. The commentators note that the donkey was the only domesticated animal that was unfit for sacrifice. Judaism reminds us that all we own, the most valuable of possessions as well as the least of what we have, all, in an ultimate way, belong to G-d. As a reminder of this, we are to dedicate the first of all things in nature, back to G-d. It is the “tax” we pay to the one who gives breath to all life. If the fruit, vegetable or animal is fit to be offered directly to G-d, than that is how it is to be handled. If for any reason it cannot be offered to G-d, the value of the offering is given to a Kohen or a Levite. Since we no longer have a Temple to sacrifice to G-d, all offerings are therefore, redeemed by giving money to a Kohen.
Since a Kohen or Levite dedicate their own lives to G-d, everything they own is already dedicated to G-d and can not be redeemed. Once something is declared “holy” it belongs to G-d and we mortals can not use it in any way nor derive any benefit from it. That is why, if we fail to redeem it, we can’t use it in any way at all, even after it is dead. We can’t use the meat, bones, hide or even the ashes. It all belongs to G-d. The unusual method of killing the donkey was specified lest someone think that the animal was being sacrificed.
What are we to make of these kinds of laws, tied to sacrifices that we no longer offer and to animals that no longer are a part of our possessions? I think that this should remind us that all we have, all that we make or grow, we have because of the love and care of our Creator. We should use these laws to remind ourselves that we need to take a part of all we make, and all we grow, perhaps we can even extend it to beginning a new job or opening a new store. Some of the first profits from that enterprise should be directed to G-d. It can be given to a Kohen if one would like, but even if it is given to charity as a way or extending our thanks to G-d for the opportunities with which we have been blessed.
In a world where everyone seems to be saying “It’s all MINE!” We need to pause and remember that all we are and all we have are just blessing. Blessing shared with us by the merciful G-d.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)