Top Sources by Category - May 2017

(27) And God created man in His image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

(1) Ben Zoma says: Who is the wise one? He who learns from all men, as it says, "I have acquired understanding from all my teachers" (Psalms 119:99). Who is the mighty one? He who conquers his impulse, as it says, "slowness to anger is better than a mighty person and the ruler of his spirit than the conqueror of a city." (Proverbs 16:32). Who is the rich one? He who is happy with his lot, as it says, "When you eat [from] the work of your hands, you will be happy, and it will be well with you" (Psalms 128:2). "You will be happy" in this world, and "it will be well with you" in the world to come. Who is honored? He who honors the created beings, as it says, "For those who honor Me, I will honor; and those who despise Me will be held in little esteem" (I Samuel 2:30).

one is not bound to attend to it. Therefore, there is no reason to make certain from the outset to light it with materials that burn well, as even if it is extinguished, he is not required to relight it. However, he also holds that it is permitted to use its light. As a result, he must ensure that the wick burns well on Shabbat; if not, he is liable to come to adjust the flame in order to use its light. The third opinion is that which Rabbi Zeira said that Rav Mattana said, and others say that Rabbi Zeira said that Rav said: The wicks and oils with which the Sages said one may not light on Shabbat, one may, nevertheless, light with them on Hanukkah, both during the week and on Shabbat. Rabbi Yirmeya said: What is Rav’s reason? He holds that if it is extinguished, one is not bound to attend to it and relight it, and it is prohibited to use its light. Therefore, even on Shabbat, there is no concern lest he come to adjust the wick, as it is prohibited to utilize its light. The Gemara relates that the Sages said this halakha before Abaye in the name of Rabbi Yirmeya and he did not accept it, as he did not hold Rabbi Yirmeya in high regard. However, subsequently, when Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, the Sages said this halakha before Abaye in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan, and he accepted it. Then Abaye said regretfully: Had I merited, I would have learned this halakha from the outset. The Gemara wonders: Didn’t he ultimately learn it and accept it? What difference does it make from whom and at what point he learned it? The Gemara answers: The practical difference is with regard to knowledge acquired in one’s youth, which is better remembered. With regard to the opinion that one need not rekindle the Hanukkah light if it is extinguished, the Gemara asks: And is it true that if the Hanukkah light is extinguished one is not bound to attend to it? The Gemara raises a contradiction from that which was taught in a baraita: The mitzva of kindling the Hanukkah lights is from sunset until traffic in the marketplace ceases. Does that not mean that if the light is extinguished, he must rekindle it so that it will remain lit for the duration of that period? The Gemara answers: No, the baraita can be understood otherwise: That if one did not yet light at sunset, he may still light the Hanukkah lights until traffic ceases. Alternatively, one could say that this is referring to the matter of its measure. One must prepare a wick and oil sufficient to burn for the period lasting from sunset until traffic ceases. If he did so, even if the light is extinguished beforehand, he need not relight it. The expression until traffic in the marketplace ceases is mentioned here, and the Gemara asks: Until when exactly is this time? Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Until the traffic of the people of Tadmor [tarmoda’ei] ceases. They sold kindling wood and remained in the marketplace later than everyone else. People who discovered at sunset that they had exhausted their wood supply could purchase wood from them. The Sages taught in a baraita: The basic mitzva of Hanukkah is each day to have a light kindled by a person, the head of the household, for himself and his household. And the mehadrin, i.e., those who are meticulous in the performance of mitzvot, kindle a light for each and every one in the household. And the mehadrin min hamehadrin, who are even more meticulous, adjust the number of lights daily. Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagree as to the nature of that adjustment. Beit Shammai say: On the first day one kindles eight lights and, from there on, gradually decreases the number of lights until, on the last day of Hanukkah, he kindles one light. And Beit Hillel say: On the first day one kindles one light, and from there on, gradually increases the number of lights until, on the last day, he kindles eight lights. Ulla said: There were two amora’im in the West, Eretz Yisrael, who disagreed with regard to this dispute, Rabbi Yosei bar Avin and Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida. One said that the reason for Beit Shammai’s opinion is that the number of lights corresponds to the incoming days, i.e., the future. On the first day, eight days remain in Hanukkah, one kindles eight lights, and on the second day seven days remain, one kindles seven, etc. The reason for Beit Hillel’s opinion is that the number of lights corresponds to the outgoing days. Each day, the number of lights corresponds to the number of the days of Hanukkah that were already observed. And one said that the reason for Beit Shammai’s opinion is that the number of lights corresponds to the bulls of the festival of Sukkot: Thirteen were sacrificed on the first day and each succeeding day one fewer was sacrificed (Numbers 29:12–31). The reason for Beit Hillel’s opinion is that the number of lights is based on the principle: One elevates to a higher level in matters of sanctity and one does not downgrade. Therefore, if the objective is to have the number of lights correspond to the number of days, there is no alternative to increasing their number with the passing of each day. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: There were two Elders in Sidon, and one of them acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, and one of them acted in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel. Each provided a reason for his actions: One gave a reason for his actions: The number of lights corresponds to the bulls of the Festival. And one gave a reason for his actions: The number of lights is based on the principle: One elevates to a higher level in matters of sanctity and one does not downgrade. The Sages taught in a baraita: It is a mitzva to place the Hanukkah lamp at the entrance to one’s house on the outside, so that all can see it. If he lived upstairs, he places it at the window adjacent to the public domain. And in a time of danger, when the gentiles issued decrees to prohibit kindling lights, he places it on the table and that is sufficient to fulfill his obligation. Rava said: One must kindle another light in addition to the Hanukkah lights in order to use its light, as it is prohibited to use the light of the Hanukkah lights. And if there is a bonfire, he need not light an additional light, as he can use the light of the bonfire. However, if he is an important person, who is unaccustomed to using the light of a bonfire, even though there is a bonfire, he must kindle another light. The Gemara asks: What is Hanukkah, and why are lights kindled on Hanukkah? The Gemara answers: The Sages taught in Megillat Ta’anit: On the twenty-fifth of Kislev, the days of Hanukkah are eight. One may not eulogize on them and one may not fast on them. What is the reason? When the Greeks entered the Sanctuary they defiled all the oils that were in the Sanctuary by touching them. And when the Hasmonean monarchy overcame them and emerged victorious over them, they searched and found only one cruse of oil that was placed with the seal of the High Priest, undisturbed by the Greeks. And there was sufficient oil there to light the candelabrum for only one day. A miracle occurred and they lit the candelabrum from it eight days. The next year the Sages instituted those days and made them holidays with recitation of hallel and special thanksgiving in prayer and blessings. We learned there in a mishna with regard to damages: In the case of a spark that emerges from under a hammer, and went out of the artisan’s workshop, and caused damage, the one who struck the hammer is liable. Similarly, in the case of a camel that is laden with flax and it passed through the public domain, and its flax entered into a store, and caught fire from the storekeeper’s lamp, and set fire to the building, the camel owner is liable. Since his flax entered into another’s domain, which he had no permission to enter, all the damages were caused due to his negligence. However, if the storekeeper placed his lamp outside the store and it set fire to the flax, the storekeeper is liable, as he placed the lamp outside his domain where he had no right to place it. Rabbi Yehuda says: If the flax was set on fire by the storekeeper’s Hanukkah lamp that he placed outside the entrance to his store, he is not liable, as in that case, it is permitted for the storekeeper to place his lamp outside. Ravina said in the name of Rabba: That is to say that it is a mitzva to place the Hanukkah lamp within ten handbreadths of the ground. As if it should enter your mind to say that he may place it above ten handbreadths, why is the storekeeper exempt? Let the camel owner say to the storekeeper: You should have placed the lamp above the height of a camel and its rider, and then no damage would have been caused. By failing to do so, the storekeeper caused the damage, and the camel owner should not be liable. The Gemara rejects this: And perhaps one is also permitted to place the Hanukkah lamp above ten handbreadths, and the reason Rabbi Yehuda exempted the storekeeper was due to concern for the observance of the mitzva of kindling Hanukkah lights. He held that if you burden one excessively, he will come to refrain from performing the mitzva of kindling Hanukkah lights. Since the storekeeper placed the Hanukkah lamp outside at the behest of the Sages, the storekeeper should not be required to take extra precautions. With regard to the essence of the matter Rav Kahana said that Rav Natan bar Manyumi taught in the name of Rabbi Tanḥum:

(13) "And Haran died in the presence of his father Terah" (Gen. 11:28). Rabbi Hiyya the grandson of Rabbi Adda of Yaffo [said]: Terah was a worshipper of idols. One time he had to travel to a place, and he left Abraham in charge of his store. When a man would come in to buy [idols], Abraham would ask: How old are you? They would reply: fifty or sixty. Abraham would then respond: Woe to him who is sixty years old and worships something made today - the customer would be embarrassed, and would leave. A woman entered carrying a dish full of flour. She said to him: this is for you, offer it before them. Abraham took a club in his hands and broke all of the idols, and placed the club in the hands of the biggest idol. When his father returned, he asked: who did all of this? Abraham replied: I can't hide it from you - a woman came carrying a dish of flour and told me to offer it before them. I did, and one of them said 'I will eat it first,' and another said 'I will eat it first.' The biggest one rose, took a club, and smashed the rest of them. Terah said: what, do you think you can trick me? They don't have cognition! Abraham said: Do your ears hear what your mouth is saying? Terah took Abraham and passed him off to [King] Nimrod. They said [to the king]: let us worship the fire. Abraham said to them: [rather] let us worship water, for it extinguishes fire. Nimrod agreed: let us worship water. Abraham continued: if so, let us worship the clouds, which provide water. Nimrod agreed: let us worship the clouds. Abraham continued: if so, let us worship the winds that scatter the clouds. Nimrod agreed: let us worship the winds. Abraham continued: if so, let us worship humans who are filled with wind [air]. Nimrod replied: You're just speaking words - I only worship fire. I will throw you into it, and the God you worship can save you from it. Haran was hidden and was of two minds, saying [to himself]: if Abraham is victorious, I will say I am with Abraham, and if Nimrod is victorious, I will say I am with Nimrod. When Abraham was through into the fiery furnace and saved, they asked him [Haran]: who are you with? He replied: I am with Abraham. They took him and threw him into the fire, and his insides burned up and he died before his father Terah, as it says: "And Haran died in the [lit.] on the face of his father Terah" (Gen. 11:28).

(1) All of the commandments in the Torah: whether they be the positive commandments, or the negative commandments; if a person transgressed any of them, whether he did so intentionally, whether he did so unintentionally, when he repents and returns from his sin - he is obligated to confess before God, blessed be He, as it says (Numbers 5:6-7), When a man or a women does any of the sins of man...and he shall confess his sin that he committed... - this refers to a verbal confession. And confession, that is a positive commandment. How does he confess? He says, "Please God, I have sinned, I have erred, I have [willfully but unrebelliously] transgressed, I have done such-and-such [specific sins], I am regretful, and ashamed for my actions, and I will never again return to my old ways." This is the essence of the confession, and anyone who wants to lengthen [his confession], this is praiseworthy.And it is the same for those who are liable for sin [hattat] and guilt [asham] sacrifices: at the time when they bring sacrifices for their unintentional or intentional sins, [the sacrifices] do not atone for them until they repent [do teshuvah] and confess verbally [do vidui], as it says, he shall confess the matter in which he sinned (Leviticus 5:5). So too for those who are liable for capital punishment or lashes: their death or lashing does not atone for them until they repent [do teshuvah] and confess verbally [do vidui]. And also someone who has injured his fellow or damaged his property, even though he has repaid what he owes him, he has not atoned until he confesses and turns away from similar actions forever, as it says, From any of the sins of man (Numbers 5:6).

(49b) Rabbi Simeon was journeying to Tiberias, and there were with him, Rabbi Jose, Rabbi Jehuda, and Rabbi Hiya. While on the way, they saw Rabbi Pinchus coming to meet them. After exchanging greetings, they all sat down under a great shady tree by a hillside. Then Rabbi Pinchus said: "now that we are seated, please instruct me further in the Secret Doctrine, that you are teaching daily."

Blessed is the Place [of all], Blessed is He; Blessed is the One who Gave the Torah to His people Israel, Blessed is He. Corresponding to four sons did the Torah speak; one [who is] wise, one [who is] evil, one who is innocent and one who doesn't know to ask.

What does the wise [son] say? "'What are these testimonies, statutes and judgments that the Lord our God commanded you?' (Deuteronomy 6:20)" And accordingly you will say to him, as per the laws of the Pesach sacrifice, "We may not eat an afikoman [a dessert or other foods eaten after the meal] after [we are finished eating] the Pesach sacrifice. (Mishnah Pesachim 10:8)"

What does the evil [son] say? "'What is this worship to you?' (Exodus 12:26)" 'To you' and not 'to him.' And since he excluded himself from the collective, he denied a principle [of the Jewish faith]. And accordingly, you will blunt his teeth and say to him, "'For the sake of this, did the Lord do [this] for me in my going out of Egypt' (Exodus 13:8)." 'For me' and not 'for him.' If he had been there, he would not have been saved.

What does the innocent [son] say? "'What is this?' (Exodus13:14)" And you will say to him, "'With the strength of [His] hand did the Lord take us out from Egypt, from the house of slaves' (Exodus 13:14).'"

And [regarding] the one who doesn't know to ask, you will open [the conversation] for him. As it is stated (Exodus 13:8), "And you will speak to your your son on that day saying, for the sake of this, did the Lord do [this] for me in my going out of Egypt."

(23) A group of [Jews] to whom gentiles say, “Give us one of you and we shall kill him, and if not, behold, we will kill all of them”; they should let themselves be killed and not deliver them one soul from Israel. But if they designated [the person] to them – for example, Sheva ben Bichri – they should give him to them and not let themselves be killed. Rabbi Yehuda said, “When do these words apply? In a case when he is [inside and they are] outside [a fortified city]; but in a case when he is inside and they are inside, since he will be killed and the [other Jews] will be killed, they should give him to them and not let themselves all be killed. And so did it state (II Samuel 20:22), ‘And the woman come to all of the people in her wisdom, etc.’ – she said to them, ‘Since he will be killed and you will be killed, give him to them and do not kill all of you.’” Rabbi Shimon says, “So did she say [to them], ‘Anyone who rebels against the monarchy [of the House of David] is liable to [receive] the death penalty.’”

(1) That man is created “in the image of God” is the basis of the Torah. The root-meaning of “the image" is that complete freedom we find in man, by virtue of which he possess free will. If there were no free will, there would be no place for Torah, as Maimonides writes in The Laws of Repentance. In this sense, free will is the basis of the Torah from a practical perspective. Now the knowledge that man is made “in the image of God” comes to teach that complete, perfect freedom will must exist [as well] in the true, perfect Being, may His name be blessed. This is the intellectual basis of the entire Torah upon which rests all actions.

(2) Reason certainly obligates this. For after a person has knowledge and reason to save himself and escape from the destruction of his soul, how is it conceivable that he would willingly blind his eyes from saving himself?!

(1) You have asked of me, and I will inform you of my opinion about whether it is permitted to enter into the lofts built around the Temple [in Jerusalem], which protrude into the Temple atop balconies and cantilevers; you have seen that this has been accepted as permissible, and no one objects.

(2) Answer: Know that not all lofts are the same and not all directions are the same. One needs a proper measurement to ascertain which are permitted and which are forbidden. It is clear that under the Dome [of the Rock] is the Foundation Stone (“Even Shetiyah”) without a doubt—which they call Al-Sakhrah. And if you ask: The Mishna states: “There was a stone there from the days of the prophets, called Shetiyah; it was three finger-breadths above the ground, and the Ark was placed upon it.” Yet recently we asked them and they said that it is three human-lengths above the floor of the Dome. Also, we see from outside that they ascend many steps up to the Dome. I have already written in a responsum (§639) that the floor of the Temple has been excavated several times in order to expose the foundations, and so it is much lower than it was. Consider: the Mishna states in several places that the Temple Mount was higher than Jerusalem, but now the opposite is the case. The gentiles further said that under the Dome is a cave, and that the first kings wished to know what is in it. They lowered people into it, and they died, so they closed it and filled it with dirt. To this day, no one knows what is there. I think that they were told, or they heard, that the Ark is hidden there, and so they excavated in order to find it. Therefore, the floor of the Temple was lowered, exposing the Even Shetiyah. I also heard that past kings excavated there to find the foundation of that stone, and they did not find it. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that this stone under the Dome is the Even Shetiyah, upon which was the Ark, in the Holy of Holies, toward the west side. Therefore, one who ascends into the lofts along the west side, or one who enters to peer through the opening on the west side, must measure that there are more than eleven cubits between himself and the Dome, for that was the distance from the western wall of the Temple Courtyard (Azarah) to the wall of the Sanctuary, including the thickness of the wall, for the walls were themselves sanctified. I have measured that there is no opening closer to the Dome than the small opening to the left of the Bab al-Qattanin (Cotton Merchants’ Gate; the small gate to the left is the Ablutions Gate). Therefore, one must be careful regarding the lofts above that opening. I have already heard about some sages who did not wish to enter the Suq al-Qattanin (Cotton Merchants’ Market), but this is an excessive stringency, because I measured that from there to the Dome is more than eleven cubits. Perhaps their reasoning is that it extends to the north a bit, as we will explain, with God’s help, and if the lofts are on the north side, one must measure, moving eastward from the western wall, a length of 187 cubits. All lofts built along that length are built above the length of the Temple Courtyard that runs from east to west [along the north side], and all lofts outside of that length, toward the east or the west, are not included in the prohibition. Regarding the width, you already know that the width of the Temple Courtyard, from north to south, was 135 cubits. It is apparent to naked eye that the southern wall is in its original place, because one who stands at the southwest corner sees that to the south is the Valley of Jehoshaphat. The Temple Courtyard did not extend southward further than that. Furthermore, the stones in the base there are very large, indicating that it is an ancient structure. If so, the southern edge of the building called Midrash Shlomo (the al-Aqsa Mosque) is the end of the Temple Courtyard, though it is beyond the 187 cubits running from east to west. It is part of the Temple Mount, and until this day it is built as vaults upon vaults. Nevertheless, we have ascertained that this wall itself was the wall of the Temple Courtyard on its southern side. If so, we must measure: if the lofts facing this wall on the north side are more than 135 cubits distant from this wall they are not part of the Temple Courtyard. I measured, from the southern wall to the homes and lofts built along the north side, more than 135 cubits. They are not part of the sanctified area, and one may enter them. Another way is to imagine that a string is extended from the Dome eastward: all the houses and lofts within forty cubits of this string are within the sanctified area, and anything outside of that measurement is not sanctified. This calculation is not precise, because the Sanctuary was narrow behind and wide in front, as Scripture states: “O, Ariel, Ariel!” However, to avoid uncertainty, one must avoid a thread stretched forty cubits from the wall of the Dome to the north along a length of 187 cubits from west to east. If the lofts are built on the east side, it has been explained that the present eastern wall is the eastern wall of the Temple Mount, since from that point on is the Mount of Olives. Further, the Gates of Mercy (Golden Gate) are in that wall, and the author of Kaftor Va-ferah (R. Eshtori Ha-farhi) wrote that these are the gates through which mourners and grooms entered. It is permissible to enter all of the houses and lofts on the east side, because from the eastern wall of the Temple Mount to the eastern wall of the Temple Courtyard there are 313 cubits, and one who has been defiled by a corpse may enter the Temple Mount. If there are lofts in the southern wall, within the length of 187 cubits from west to east, they are also part of the sanctified area. In general, I say that the houses or lofts along the north and east sides are not the subject of uncertainty, and one may enter them as long as they do not protrude a great deal into the Temple, in which case it is necessary to estimate. Similarly, those on the south and west sides require estimation. Know that the Talmud queries: “What is the law if he suspended himself in the air above the Temple Courtyard?” It is resolved in a stalemate, and this is a Torah prohibition according to a rabbi who maintains that [the Temple’s] sanctity remains, so we are stringent, and it is forbidden. According to Tosafot, it is clear that the air of the Temple Courtyard has been sanctified, and even though a beraita in the chapter “Yedi’ot Ha-tum’ah” (Shevu’ot 17b) teaches: “A defiled person who enters the Temple Courtyard via roofs is exempt, as Scripture states: ‘He shall not come into the Temple’—the Torah only forbids the normal way of coming in,” though he is exempt from punishment, it is nevertheless forbidden, and he is given the beatings of the rebellious. Maimonides writes likewise in chapter 3 of the Laws of Entering the Temple: “Although he is exempt from extirpation, he is given the beatings of the rebellious, whether he entered the Temple through roofs or through openings in a chest, crate, or large closet. One may ask: Since the roofs and lofts were not sanctified, and Tosafot concede that no lofts were sanctified except for the loft above the Sanctuary, why would it not be permissible to enter into the all of the lofts even now? In answer, you should know that we only say that the roofs and lofts that were built when the Temple stood were not sanctified, but the roofs and lofts that are now built around the Temple may be built into the air of the Temple Courtyard or the air of the chambers that existed them. Thus, we have not eliminated uncertainty. Therefore, if it is clear according to the calculations I wrote that they are built in the sanctified zone, we will not pay attention to the height and suggest that perhaps they are built above the roofs of the chambers that were not sanctified, since the air of the Temple Courtyard is like the Temple Courtyard. Nevertheless, I must offer a reason for the widespread practice whereby people go up into those lofts to observe the entire Temple, and we have neither seen nor heard anyone objecting. Consider that Ra’avad maintains that nowadays there is no punishment of extirpation for one who enters the Temple. You will find this in the glosses on chapter 6 of the Laws of the Temple. Thus, the black-letter law is disputed, and it is uncertain whether these lofts are built in the sanctified area or not. And even if they are built in the sanctified area, perhaps the air of the Temple Courtyard was not sanctified, for there is an interpretation that Rava’s query about one who suspended himself in the air above the Temple Courtyard is really asking whether the air of the Temple Courtyard was sanctified or not according to the text of our books, and it is not resolved. And even if the air of the Temple Courtyard is like the Temple Courtyard, perhaps they are built above the air of the roofs of the chambers, which were not sanctified. Therefore, since there are all these uncertainties, they inclined this matter toward leniency out of their great desire to gaze upon the sacred place. The rationale that the Torah forbade the normal way of coming in, and so via roofs does not constitute a Torah prohibition, is not a basis for leniency. It would be fine if one were to ascend and descent immediately, without delaying for the amount of time in which one can prostrate himself. However, if they are built in the sanctified area, granted that one is exempt from “He shall not come into the Temple,” however he is still liable as a defiled person who remained in the Temple. I have this written to you the reason for the practice, but you shall be one of the scrupulous and will enter neither house nor loft unless it is very far from the Dome. I have also heard that there is an underground tunnel whose opening is on the west side and which runs under the Dome, and that there are Jews who enter there. This is forbidden, as we maintain that tunnels that open into the Temple Courtyard were sanctified, and who says that this is not in the category of tunnels that open into the Temple Courtyard? And even if we accept that this [tunnel] was made recently, the floor of the Temple Courtyard was sanctified all the way down to the abyss, as stated in Zevahim. I have now seen, and I have been told by people who know how to measure, that there is no opening and no loft whose distance from the Dome is not greater than the measurement I wrote. Therefore, one may come close to the openings and ascend to the lofts, especially given the concatenation of uncertainties that I wrote.