Sunday, February 28, 2021

Why 4 cups of wine? TB Pesakhim 99

With today's daf TB Pesakhim 99 we finished the ninth chapter of our massekhet and begin the 10th and final chapter. The 10th chapter discusses the actual Seder which you and I enjoy to this very day! You should know that the Seder is modeled with at least one important difference after a Greek symposium. If you're interested in understanding the origins of our Seder I highly recommend that you turn to these two books. The first book is The Origins of the Seder by Baruch M. Bokser and the second book is Aphrodite and the Rabbis by Burton L Visotzky.  

The Mishna  begins setting the stage by discussing the prerequisites of the Seder. " On the eve of Passover, adjacent to minḥa time, a person may not eat until dark, so that he will be able to eat matza that night with a hearty appetite. Even the poorest of Jews should not eat the meal on Passover night until he reclines on his left side, as free and wealthy people recline when they eat. And the distributors of charity should not give a poor person less than four cups of wine for the Festival meal of Passover night. And this halakha applies even if the poor person is one of the poorest members of society and receives his food from the charity plate.." (Sefaria.org translation)

The rabbis wanted us to have a hearty appetite to eat the matza with gusto; consequently, they ordained that we should stop eating before minkha ketana, or 2 1/2 hours after midday.Tosefot (ד"ה לא יכאל אדם) explains what is forbidden since we already know that we should not eat matza until the Seder and by that time we are forbidden to eat hametz. What is forbidden is matza ashira or what we call egg matza. This was the custom of Rebbeinu Tam to refrain from eating matza ashira. Perhaps the situation under discussion is one we are facing this year when the Seder night begins at the conclusion of Shabbat. How do we squeeze in a third meal on Shabbat, when both matza and hametz are forbidden? The answer is one eats matza ashira  as part of your third meal befor minkha ketanah.

Nowhere in the Babylonian Talmud a reason is given why we drink 4 cups of wine. It just states that even the poorest of the poor must be given enough money to cover the 4 cups of wine. Tosefot ultimately comes to the conclusion that everybody around the Seder table needs 4 cups of wine and not just the master of the house.

The Jerusalem Talmud (Chapter 10, Halakha 1); however, provides many different explanations why we have 4 cups of wine. They are:

1.  Each cup wine symbolizes one of the four languages of redemption, "I will free youוְהוֹצֵאתִ֣י-" "I will deliver you-וְהִצַּלְתִּ֥י" "I will redeem you -וְגָאַלְתִּ֤י" and "I will take you-וְלָקַחְתִּ֨י"

2. Each cup represents the four times the Butler says the word "pharaoh’s cup" while describing his dream to Joseph in prison.

3. Each cup represents one of the four evil kingdoms (Babylonian, Medea, Greece, and Rome) that have or will rule over Israel knowing that they will be defeated in the end and Israel will be redeemed.

4. Each cup represents the cup of the punishment that God is going to force the wicked nations to drink.

Each cup represents a cup of deliverance for Israel as described in the book of the prophets. 

Midrash Shemot Rabbah 6:4 teaches that Pharaoh decreed four harsh decrees against Israel and we drink 4 cups of wine declaring "I will lift up the cup of deliverance and call upon the name of the Lord" because the decrees were nullified.

The Meiri (TB Pesakhim 89b ד"ה ולא ) teaches that each one of the four languages of redemption describes a different aspect of freedom.  "I will free you" is the promise that God will free us from harsh labor. "I will deliver you" is the promise that God will free us from slavery. "I will redeem you" is the promise that God will redeem the Israelites with an outstretched arm removing their low self-image. "I will take you" is God's promise that he will take us as His holy nation and give us the Torah.

Because of the effects of the pandemic we haven't seen so much food insecurity in our midst since the Great Depression. No matter what the reason is, the 4 cups  of wine calls us to action. We, who have been blessed by God with all the necessaries, need to help all the different Jewish soup kitchens like Masbiah in Brooklyn and Queens who provide on a daily basis and for holidays food for those who are in need without regard to race, religion, or creed. Only then can we truly enjoy our Seder!


Saturday, February 27, 2021

You talk too much TB Pesakhim 98

 I reached the age when I'm known to misplace things like my glasses or my cell phone. So far I've never lost anything really important or large. I wonder how could a person lose his lamb he designated as his korban Pesakh. Sacrificing and then eating the lamb with matza and maror was the very essence of the Passover celebration. I would think he would guard the lamb to avoid all the complications discussed on the last two dappim of Talmud.

Today's daf TB Pesakhim 98 discusses different scenarios when a group's lamb is lost and found and in between the group decides to designate another lamb as the korban Pesakh. The Mishna lays out the case and the Gemara comments on it.

MISHNA: With regard to a group whose Paschal lamb was lost, and they said to one member of the group: Go and search for our Paschal lamb, and when you find it, slaughter it on our behalf; and he went and found the missing offering and slaughtered it on behalf of the entire group, but in the meantime they took a different animal and slaughtered it as a Paschal lamb, the halakha is as follows: If his Paschal lamb was slaughtered first, he eats from his offering, as he is considered to be registered specifically for that offering, and they eat with him from his offering, because he included them in his offering and it belongs to the entire group. The second animal does not have any registrants and is therefore burned. And if theirs was slaughtered first, they eat from theirs because they withdrew from the original offering through the act of slaughtering a replacement, and he eats from his because he was not registered for the replacement offering sacrificed by the remainder of his group.

GEMARA: The Sages taught: If he, the agent, said to the other members of the group that if they slaughter their Paschal lamb first they should include him, and they said to him that if he slaughters his Paschal lamb first he should include them, all of them eat from the first Paschal lamb that was slaughtered, and the second one must be burned. If he did not say this to them and they did not say this to him, they are not responsible for each other, and each side eats its own Paschal lamb. From here the Sages stated: Silence is fitting for the wise, and a fortiori the same is true for fools. In the case under discussion, had neither side appointed the other to slaughter the Paschal lamb on its behalf, both offerings would be valid and would be consumed. When each side appointed the other to slaughter the Paschal lamb on its behalf, only the first one slaughtered may be eaten while the second one must be burned. This is as it is stated: Even a fool, when he holds his peace, is considered wise; and he that shuts his lips is esteemed as a man of understanding’ (Proverbs 17:28).” (Sefaria.org translation)

I think it is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you're wise then opening it and proving them wrong.


Friday, February 26, 2021

Backups to my backup TB Pesakhim 97

 To appreciate today's daf TB Pesakhim 97, you have to be quite familiar with the laws of sacrifices (קדשין). For example, there is a halakha of Moses from Mount Sinai that there are 5 sin offerings that are not offered up on the altar  because they are not eligible as sin offerings. Animal rights activists will be happy to learn that they are placed in a locked room and starved to death. The five categories are: 1, an offspring of the sin offering, 2, the exchange animal (תמורה) of the sin offering, 3, the sin offering when its owners died before it was sacrificed, 4, a sin offering when the owner already gained atonement for the same sin with a another sin offering, 5, a sin offering that is ineligible because it's too old.

Admittedly, I know next to nothing in this area of Jewish law. I also find these pages difficult because these laws are very theoretical ever since the Temple was destroyed back in the year 70 CE by the Romans. Neither am I praying for the restitution of animal sacrifices as the main mode of worship. I just hope that I earned heavenly credit by studying pages like this in Talmud.

I did find a case mentioned in today's daf that I can truly identify with. "Rabbi Oshaya said: If one separated two sin-offerings from the outset as a guarantee, so that if one is lost he may gain atonement with the other, he gains atonement with one of them and the second is left to graze." (Sefaria.org translation)  Rabbi Oshaya is describing someone who is so worried about gaining atonement that it brings along "insurance" of another animal just in case that something happens to the first animal like it wanders off and gets lost.

As a rabbi I am very anxious about everything surrounding my sermons before and during High Holidays. Just before  Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, I make backup of my backups of my sermons. There's one on the bimah, another one on my desk, another one I email to myself so I can access it from any computer, and of course, there's one on my computer. Thank God, I have never misplaced my original bimah sermon. One of my sons when he took a break from services and rested in my office, he would read my backup sermon. Returning to the main sanctuary and sitting next to his mother during the sermon, he would quietly and confidently tell her that in 10 seconds Abba is going to tell this joke. And I did!





Thursday, February 25, 2021

Two Passover customs explained in the light of daf TB Pesakhim 96

 Obviously there has to be some differences how the Jewish people celebrated Passover when they left Egypt (Pesakh Mitzrayim-פֶּסַח מִצְרַיִם) and all subsequent Passovers (Pesakh dorot-פֶסַח דּוֹרוֹת). The first Mishnah on our daf TB Pesakhim 96 delineates four major differences.

What are the differences between the Paschal lamb that the Jewish people offered in Egypt and the Paschal lamb offered in all later generations? The Paschal lamb the Jewish people offered in Egypt had to be taken from the tenth of the month of Nisan and required the people to sprinkle its blood with a bundle of hyssop, unlike the Paschal lamb in all later years, and its blood was also sprinkled upon the lintel and the two doorposts, and it was eaten with haste; in addition, the Paschal lamb in Egypt was only on one night, whereas the Paschal lamb throughout the generations is observed for seven days. (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara lists six laws that applied to both Pesakh Mitzrayim and Pesakh dorot. They are:

1. The korban Pesakh needs to be guarded lest it develops an unqualified blemish.

2. The korban Pesakh needs to be eaten at night and not during the day.

3. Neither an uncircumcised man nor an apostate may participate in the korban Pesakh.

4. A sojourner and a hired servant are not automatically eligible to participate in the korban Pesakh.

5. One is forbidden to break a bone of the korban Pesakh.

6. One is forbidden to eat a raw korban Pesakh.

Obviously this is not an exhaustive list of similarities. I can think of at least one more similarity. The korban Pesakh needs to be roasted.

There was a custom in Italy and some places in Germany to set the Seder table 3 days before the holiday. It has been suggested that our Mishnah is the source of this custom. The three days are in remembrance of the commandment to separate the korban Pesakh on the 10th of Nisan. To reconcile the difference between the three days of this custom and the four days mentioned in the Torah and the Mishnah, a commentator said that there were three complete days and the last day was a partial day because the korban Pesakh was offered up starting in the early afternoon of the fourth day. Personally I don’t understand how they could make the house completely kosher for Passover so far in advance of the holiday. My house is never ready until the very last minute.

The Gemara shows that there is a strong link or connection between the korban Pesakh and circumcision. Perhaps this link provides another explanation why we have an Elijah’s cup. Elijah attends every brit milah. We even designate a special chair for him (כסא של אליהו). At our Seder when we pour wine into Elijah’s cup and expect him to join us, we can happily proclaim that we have scrupulously observed this mitzvah of brit milah.

Wednesday, February 24, 2021

Pesakh rishon and Pesakh sheni and the rule of three TB Pesakhim 95

 Today’s daf TB Pesakhim 95 delineates the difference between Pesakh rishon and Pesakh sheni. To facilitate memorization, the Gemara likes to organize ideas in groups of three. 1, Pesakh rishon and Pesakh sheni share all the laws that relate directly to the korban Pesakh (מִצְוָה שֶׁבְּגוּפוֹ), for example, the lamb or the goat must be roasted. 2, They also share all the laws that are accessory to the korban Pesakh (מִצְוָה שֶׁעַל גּוּפוֹ,), for example, the Passover sacrifice must be eaten with matza and marror, bitter herbs. 3, Any other aspect of Passover is only observed on Pesakh rishon and not on Pesakh sheni (מִצְוֹת שֶׁלֹּא עַל גּוּפוֹ), for example, the removal of all hmatez

In a baraita the rabbis classify the laws into three categories.

The first category are positive commitments (מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה). “The Sages taught in a different baraita: The verse states: ‘According to the entire statute of the Paschal lamb they shall offer it’ (Numbers 9:12). One might have thought that just as at the time of the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb on the first Pesakh it is prohibited to own leaven due to the prohibitions of: It shall not be seen, and: It shall not be found, so too, at the time of the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb on the second Pesakh it is prohibited to own leaven due to the prohibitions of: It shall not be seen, and: It shall not be found. Therefore, the Torah states: 'They shall eat it with matzot and bitter herbs’ (Numbers 9:11), which indicates that the other mitzvot pertaining to the first Pesakh do not apply on the second.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The second category are negative commitments that can be rectified (מִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנִּיתָּק לַעֲשֵׂה). “The baraita continues: And from here I have derived only that positive mitzvot related to the first Pesakh apply on the second Pesakh; from where do I derive that the same is true of negative mitzvot? The verse states: ‘They shall leave none of it to the morning, nor break a bone in it’ (Numbers 9:12). The baraita continues: And from this verse I have derived only that a negative mitzva whose violation can be rectified by the fulfillment of a positive mitzva applies on the second Pesakh, e.g., the prohibition of leaving over meat from the Paschal lamb until morning, which can be rectified by the positive mitzva of burning the leftovers;” (Sefaria.org translation)

The third category is negative commandments (מִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה) “from where is it derived that the same is true of a full-fledged negative mitzva? The verse states: 'They shall not break a bone in it.' It may be concluded from these examples that just as the detail, i.e., the specific mitzvot mentioned in these verses, is explicit and includes a positive mitzva, a prohibition whose violation can be rectified by the fulfillment of a positive mitzva, and a full-fledged negative mitzva; so too, every positive mitzva, every prohibition whose violation can be rectified by the fulfillment of a positive mitzva, and every full-fledged negative mitzva is included.” (Sefaria.org translation)






Tuesday, February 23, 2021

Time or Distance TB Pesakhim 94

As we learned yesterday a person who cannot bring his korban Pesakh on Pesakh rishon because he is too far away from Jerusalem (derekh rekhoka-דרך רחוקה), brings his Passover sacrifice on Pesakh sheni. We also learned if you draw a circle with the Temple courtyard at the center, anywhere beyond a radius of 15 klms is considered a derekh rekhoka.

Today’s daf TB Pesakhim 94 definitively determines whether derekh rekhoka is a function of time or distance. Up to now we been speaking about the average person walking, What happens if he is beyond the 15 km radius, but has a faster mode of travel like riding on a horse? “The Sages taught: If one was standing outside the city of Modi’im and was able to enter Jerusalem on horses or mules but not by walking, I might have thought he would be liable to receive karet for failing to come to Jerusalem and offer the Paschal lamb; therefore, the verse states: ‘And is not on a journey’ (Numbers 9:13). This person was on a distant journey and is therefore exempt.” (Sefaria.org translation)

What happens if the person is within the 15 km radius of Jerusalem, but is traveling with a large entourage of women and children who slows him down so he won’t make it in time to offer his korban Pesakh? Can we consider that situation comparable to a derekh rekhoka? “On the other hand, if one was standing closer to Jerusalem than Modi’im but was not able to enter due to the camels and carriages that are carrying his family and delaying him, I might have thought he would not be liable for failing to offer the Paschal lamb because he is trying to enter; therefore, the verse states: ‘And is not on a journey’ and this person was not on a distant journey and is therefore liable. This person could have dismounted and come to Jerusalem on foot, but he wanted to bring his family with him in a carriage and was consequently delayed. One's liability is determined based on his distance from Jerusalem.” (Sefaria.org translation)

We see that derekh rekhoka is a function of distance and not of time. Rambam accepts the idea that derekh rekhoka is a function of distance. Even though a person doesn’t fall within the category of derekh rekhoka, one who is within the 15 km radius, but is delayed because of circumstances beyond his control (נֶאֱנַס) like a large slow-moving family, offers his korban Pesakh on Pesakh sheni. (Mishneh Torah, Sefer Korbanot, Hilkhot Pesakh, Chapter 5 Halakha 9)



 

Monday, February 22, 2021

Pesakh sheni, the second Passover TB Pesakhim 93

The ninth chapter of massekhet Pesakhim discusses various aspects of Pesakh sheni1. In the wilderness some people came to Moses and said that they were ineligible to offer up the korban Pesakh at its appointed time. They wondered how could they celebrate Passover? Moses inquired God on their behalf and God set aside the 14th day of the following month as Pesakh sheni ( a second Passover) as it is written “And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people, saying: When any of you or of your posterity who are defiled by a corpse or are on a long journey would offer a passover sacrifice to the LORD, they shall offer it in the second month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at twilight. They shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, (Numbers 9:9-11)” (Sefaia.org translation) Today’s daf TB Pesakhim 93 defines the very nature of Pesakh sheni and what constitutes a long journey.

The Gemara posits three different positions concerning the very nature of Pesakh sheni, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, Rabbi Natan, and Rabbi Hananya ben Akavya.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that Passover (Pesakh rishon-the first Passover) and Pesakh sheni are two independent holidays. “One is liable to receive karet for intentionally refraining from observing the first Pesakh; similarly, one who could not observe the first Pesakh is liable to receive karet if he intentionally refrained from observing the second Pesakh. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rabbi Natan holds that Pesakh sheni is a makeup day. A person would only be liable of the penalty of keret for Pesakh rishon and not for Pesakh sheni. “Rabbi Natan says: One is liable to receive karet for intentionally refraining from observing the first Pesakh; and one is exempt from karet for intentionally refraining from observing the second Pesakh even if he unwittingly failed to observe the first Pesakh, as the Torah does not specify a punishment of karet with regard to the second Pesakh." (Sefaria.org translation)

Rabbi Hananya ben Akavya holds the most lenient position believing that Pesakh sheni and Pesakh rishon are working in concert. The penalty of karet for failure to bring the Passover sacrifice on Pesakh is suspended until Pesakh sheni. The korban Pesakh on Pesakh sheni acquits the person of the punishment of karet. “Rabbi Hananya ben Akavya says: Even for intentionally failing to observe the first Pesakh one is liable to receive karet only if he intentionally fails to observe the second Pesakh.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The example of a minor who reaches the age of majority between Pesakh rishon and Pesakh sheni highlights the practical differences between the three points of view. According to Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi, this person needs to bring a korban Pesakh on Pesakh sheni or be liable for the penalty of karet because Pesakh rishon and Pesakh sheni are independent of each other. According to Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Hananya ben Akavya, he is free from the obligation of bringing a korban Pesakh on Pesakh sheni because he was never obligated to bring one on Pesakh rishon. Rambam poskins in favor of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s position. (Mishneh Torah, Sefer Korbanot, Hilkhot Pesakh, Chapter 5 Halalkha 2)

The Mishnah defines the distance of what constitutes a long journey. “What is the definition of a distant journey that exempts one from observing the first Pesakh? Anywhere from the city of Modi'im and beyond, and from anywhere located an equal distance from Jerusalem and beyond in every direction; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Eliezer says: From the threshold of the Temple courtyard and beyond is considered a distant journey; therefore, anyone located outside the courtyard at the time that the Paschal lamb is slaughtered is exempt from observing the first Pesakh.” (Sefaria.org translation) The Gamara says the distance between Modi’in an Jerusalem is 15 mil or approximately 15 km. The Talmudic Modi’in can’t be identified with the modern city of Modi’in because the modern city is 34.9 km away from Jerusalem. To identify the Talmudic town of Modi’in, I suggest you read the following article “Where is Modi’in” by Prof. Yoel Elitzur. (https://www.etzion.org.il/en/where-modiin)

 

1. All discussions surrounding Pesakh sheni are theoretical since the destruction of the second Temple. The day is on the Jewish calendar simply as a reminder of his previous stature.

Sunday, February 21, 2021

What’s the difference? TB Pesakhim 92

 With today’s daf TB Pesakhim 92 we finish the eighth chapter of our massekhet and begin the ninth chapter. The Gemara concludes by citing three examples when a rabbinic ordinance is upheld even though one would violate a commandment with the punishment of karet (i.e. not offering up the korban Pesakh). Consequently, that person would have to bring his korban Pesakh on Pesakh sheni, a month later. Immediately afterwards, we learn of the three examples when a rabbinic ordinance is not upheld because violation of a commandment with the punishment of karet and the person should bring is Passover sacrifice on Passover.

Rava said: With regard to an uncircumcised gentile who converted, sprinkling the purification waters to purify impurity imparted by a corpse (מי חטאת-mai khatat), and a circumcision scalpel [izmel]1, the Sages upheld their statement even in a situation in which doing so would violate a prohibition that carries the punishment of karet. However, with regard to an acute mourner (ענינות-aneenut)2, a leper, and a beit haperas, an area in which a doubt exists concerning the location of a grave or a corpse, they did not uphold their statement in a situation in which doing so would violate a prohibition that carries the punishment of karet.3

(Sefaia.org translation)

If you’re interested, the Gemara explains each one of these cases in detail to conclude our daf. What is the qualitative difference between the first three cases in the last three cases which decides whether the rabbinic decree is upheld or not? The Rishonim explained the cases where the rabbis upheld their decrees because of the fear of transgressing the Torah law. An male convert circumcised on erev Pesakh is forbidden to partake of the korban Pesakh that year for fear the next year he might become ritually unready and think all he has to do is go to the mikvah in order to eat the korban Pesakh.4 Concerning the scalpel and the purification waters of the red heifer, the rabbis were afraid the person would carry it in a Torah prohibited space. These fears do not apply at all to the latter three cases

Rambam explains the reason differently in two cases. Rarely does the convert undergo circumcision and immersion on the same day. Usually he waits a period of time after the surgery to heal before entering the mikvah. he would not be eligible to eat the korban Pesakh during this intermediate time. Concerning the sprinkling of the purification waters a person is violating the Shabbat for a future time which is prohibited.


1This case is talking about carrying the scalpel for the purpose of a brit milah in rabbinic prohibited spaces on Shabbat

2According to the Torah acute mourning is only during the day of death and not during the night. Only by rabbinic decree is acute mourning continues into the nighttime.

3In the latter three cases the person would be able to correct his situation by going through the specific process of becoming ritually ready in the daytime and then being able to eat his korban Pesakh.

4The rules of ritual on readiness do not apply to a Gentile. The Jew by choice may not realize that is status is changed and draw the wrong conclusion.